Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 32

Bill Williams said:
Apologies if this has been covered...

Just saw Knox on one of the US morning shows, discussing her book, 'Free'. She was asked about seeking out and actually meeting with Guiliano Mignini.

Family and fellow exonerees thought she was crazy. Yet after she and he rehashed 'the case', disagreeing on more than they agreed - they both shifted gears, both trying to find the humanity in the other.

For her, the concession she offered was her forgiveness.

From him in return, was an incredible admission, acc. to Knox. That if he'd known the 37-year old version of Amanda Knox, that this was - as he was now convinced to be true - the *real* Amanda Knox....

... that he would never have prosecuted her.

One has to sit with that claim for a minute. Kudos to Knox - probably to Mignini as well - for both being committed 17 1/2 years later - of seeing the humanity in the other.
Click to expand...
Amanda Knox was interviewed on the NPR program Fresh Air broadcast 26 March 2025:

 
The Italian Supreme Court upholds the calunnia while the prosecuting magistrate, off the record, says he would never have prosecuted her in the first place. Hmmmm!

Hoots
 
TomG said:
The Italian Supreme Court upholds the calunnia while the prosecuting magistrate, off the record, says he would never have prosecuted her in the first place. Hmmmm!

Hoots
Click to expand...
Still, this is not directly from Mignini himself. It is, at beast, anecdotal.

Still - the thought of one making the decision about prosecution based on who one thinks the other is..... rather than on the evidence..... my own anecdotal experience, limited as it is, is that that happens more than you know. I follow a case where someone went to jail for murder, based on the deed being done by 'street kids', during a time when the city in question was trying to 'clean up the streets'. Four people were arrested, and three were let go. Yet they charged, tried and convicted the fourth person, based solely (IMO) on having had the 'political pressure' to show the public that they were doing something about street kids.
 
Sorry for intruding, but this thread was what brought me to ISF, and it still surprises me that it's still ongoing, but I'm not really THAT surprised.

Ever since she was exonerated, I have tried to stay away (from this thread) because it always reminds me of how horrible Meredith's death was and how she must have felt those last few minutes of her life and that always upsets me, especially back in the beginning when some idiot would state that we didn't care about her one bit.

I do thank all of you who have been on their side (Amanda and Raffaele and of course Meredith) from the beginning.


-
 
Last edited:
AmyStrange said:
Sorry for intruding, but this thread was what brought me to ISF, and it still surprises me that it's still ongoing, but I'm not really THAT surprised.

Ever since she was exonerated, I have tried to stay away (from this thread) because it always reminds me of how horrible Meredith's death was and how she must have felt those last few minutes of her life and that always upsets me, especially back in the beginning when some idiot would state that we didn't care about her one bit.

I do thank all of you who have been on their side (Amanda and Raffaele and of course Meredith) from the beginning.


-
Click to expand...
AmyStrange, as you and others interested in the Knox - Sollecito case may be aware, Amanda Knox's book Free: My Search for Meaning became available 25 March 2025.

I'm about 1/7 through the book, and I recommend it for Knox's account of her feelings and experiences, through her 2024 provisional re-conviction for calunnia by the Florence Court of Appeals.

One of the interesting statements by Knox is that near the beginning of her November 2007 interrogation by Mignini, she had, in response to his questions as to why she was crying and hitting her head, replied that she had been "hit and yelled at" during the police interrogation (page 7 of the hard-bound book).
 
Numbers said:
AmyStrange, as you and others interested in the Knox - Sollecito case may be aware, Amanda Knox's book Free: My Search for Meaning became available 25 March 2025.

I'm about 1/7 through the book, and I recommend it for Knox's account of her feelings and experiences, through her 2024 provisional re-conviction for calunnia by the Florence Court of Appeals.

One of the interesting statements by Knox is that near the beginning of her November 2007 interrogation by Mignini, she had, in response to his questions as to why she was crying and hitting her head, replied that she had been "hit and yelled at" during the police interrogation (page 7 of the hard-bound book).
Click to expand...


Thank you. I'm going to put it on my reading list, but I don't know if I'll be able to read it without crying.


-
 
I watched an interview on AK this evening on YouTube. I haven’t been on this site for years. I am surprised and pleased there are still those soldiers out there “proving” the bleeding obvious to the bleeding stupid. Have any of the doubters on the absurd “guilty” side still not seen the light? Vixen? Oh dear, I remember her but wish I didn’t.
Anything interesting other than the defamation case? Italy is slow…my word!
The truth has spoken and I hope the haters have crawled back under their respective rocks.
 
Mike1711 said:
I watched an interview on AK this evening on YouTube. I haven’t been on this site for years. I am surprised and pleased there are still those soldiers out there “proving” the bleeding obvious to the bleeding stupid. Have any of the doubters on the absurd “guilty” side still not seen the light? Vixen? Oh dear, I remember her but wish I didn’t.
Anything interesting other than the defamation case? Italy is slow…my word!
The truth has spoken and I hope the haters have crawled back under their respective rocks.
Click to expand...
Are you aware of Guede's likely upcoming trial for rape and beating up his girlfriend after being released from prison? He's been informed that the investigation is over and he's been notified that he can present his defense. That usually doesn't happen if the investigation hasn't found grounds to proceed with charges.
 
Mike1711 said:
I watched an interview on AK this evening on YouTube. I haven’t been on this site for years. I am surprised and pleased there are still those soldiers out there “proving” the bleeding obvious to the bleeding stupid. Have any of the doubters on the absurd “guilty” side still not seen the light? Vixen? Oh dear, I remember her but wish I didn’t.
Anything interesting other than the defamation case? Italy is slow…my word!
The truth has spoken and I hope the haters have crawled back under their respective rocks.
Click to expand...

I'll say this, one of the most vocal guilters at another forum abandoned the topic altogether after the final acquittal in 2015, but returned recently to it and said they had changed their mind after more reading and now believes she's innocent. That's the only one I've seen though.
 
It is sad how America turns criminals into heroes, even installing a crime family into the White House. There is nothing heroic in getting away with murder IMV. I note that Kohberger has now officially joined the ranks of Jody Arias (in her murder of Travis Alexander) and Knox & Sollecito in having turned off his communications signals (phone, GPS, etc) for the duration of the crime, probably thinking it conceals their tracks. But their absence of phone signals only serves to highlight they went incommunicado for the duration of the murders. I think Kohberger is claiming he went off the radar to 'look at stars'. (Even he has his fans. :rolleyes:)

It would have been so much better for Knox to have accepted a manslaughter-type deal; would have been out within five years, free to start a new life with a clean sheet. As it it is, the fact of her being present at the crime scene, having Meredith Kercher's blood on her hands and covering up for Guede remains as legal fact in perpetuity. Not to mention her conviction for trying to pin the crime on Lumumba.

What is sick in our society is criminals cashing in on their crimes and even being allowed to run for presidency, as though it is just a minor glitch. Whoops, I accidentally raped someone. Never mind.



.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
It is sad how America turns criminals into heroes, even installing a crime family into the White House. There is nothing heroic in getting away with murder IMV. I note that Kohberger has now officially joined the ranks of Jody Arias (in her murder of Travis Alexander) and Knox & Sollecito in having turned off his communications signals (phone, GPS, etc) for the duration of the crime, probably thinking it conceals their tracks. But their absence of phone signals only serves to highlight they went incommunicado for the duration of the murders. I think Kohberger is claiming he went off the radar to 'look at stars'. (Even he has his fans. :rolleyes:)

It would have been so much better for Knox to have accepted a manslaughter-type deal; would have been out within five years, free to start a new life with a clean sheet. As it it is, the fact of her being present at the crime scene, having Meredith Kercher's blood on her hands and covering up for Guede remains as legal fact in perpetuity. Not to mention her conviction for trying to pin the crime on Lumumba.

What is sick in our society is criminals cashing in on their crimes and even being allowed to run for presidency, as though it is just a minor glitch. Whoops, I accidentally raped someone. Never mind.



.
Click to expand...
Why do you lie? What do you gain by this?
 
Vixen wrote: As it it is, the fact of her being present at the crime scene, having Meredith Kercher's blood on her hands and covering up for Guede remains as legal fact in perpetuity.

This, although not technically a lie, has ben demonstrated to be false, many times. Yes, there are precious few in the Italian legal system, including Mignini, who still believe that Knox and Sollecito were present at the crime -but now not even Mignini believes she should have ever been prosecuted for the murder. It must feel weird to be out of step with the original prosecutor!
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
Vixen wrote: As it it is, the fact of her being present at the crime scene, having Meredith Kercher's blood on her hands and covering up for Guede remains as legal fact in perpetuity.

This, although not technically a lie, has ben demonstrated to be false, many times. Yes, there are precious few in the Italian legal system, including Mignini, who still believe that Knox and Sollecito were present at the crime -but now not even Mignini believes she should have ever been prosecuted for the murder. It must feel weird to be out of step with the original prosecutor!
Click to expand...

Claims Knox.

You forget, Mignini saw the murder scene with his own eyes, knows all about the evidence that was disallowed and he was there when she had a breakdown and confessed. He knows, you know.


.
 
Vixen said:
Claims Knox.

You forget, Mignini saw the murder scene with his own eyes, knows all about the evidence that was disallowed and he was there when she had a breakdown and confessed. He knows, you know.


.
Click to expand...
If anyone is going to argue that Amanda was at VDP7 at the time of the murder, it would have to conform to a sustainable real-life sequence of events to make sense. So far, nothing after all these years. Remember too, that Amanda's capitulation and compliance with the cop theory that Lumumba was involved was enmired in human rights abuses that may still have a long way to run. Lastly, I very much doubt that Mignini would even contemplate sitting down on amicable terms with Amanda if he thought she was factually guilty of murder.

Hoots
 
TomG said:
If anyone is going to argue that Amanda was at VDP7 at the time of the murder, it would have to conform to a sustainable real-life sequence of events to make sense. So far, nothing after all these years. Remember too, that Amanda's capitulation and compliance with the cop theory that Lumumba was involved was enmired in human rights abuses that may still have a long way to run. Lastly, I very much doubt that Mignini would even contemplate sitting down on amicable terms with Amanda if he thought she was factually guilty of murder.

Hoots
Click to expand...


Being a kind and polite man is not the same as believing Knox is innocent. His book published in Italy makes that clear.


.
 
Vixen said:
Being a kind and polite man is not the same as believing Knox is innocent. His book published in Italy makes that clear.


.
Click to expand...
Oh vey. Yes, that's what one wants out of a prosecutor. Being kind and polite. During the trial in 2009, Mignini was neither kind nor polite.

So, maybe citing some facts might put this all in perspective. Mignini STILL insists that Knox and Sollecito were on site during the murders. That is neither kind nor polite. Between Knox and he, they have agreed to at least regard each other as human beings - Knox, especially, not wanting to fall into the trap of demonizing opponents, and devaluing their humanity. She'd had enough experience with people doing that to her.

Still, the facts are these.... the acquiting court, the 2015 Supreme Court Panel was clear.... they entertained that EVEN IF Knox and Sollecito had been at the cottage at the time of the murder, the lack of ANY reliable evidence of either of them in the murder room made the whole thing moot.

In my view, Mignini showed cracks in his own thinking about the murder, showed it in the Netflix documentary. In it, he gave copious and first hand accounting of his own thinking to do with the crime. Towards the end, he, too, entertained the possibility that he might be mistaken, and if so, hoped he could get forgiveness.... or some such thing.

That's not him being kind and polite. That is a man struggling with his own conscience in ruining the lives of two people - and de facto lying to the victim's family as to the manner of their loved one's death.

Meanwhile, Rudy Guede faces new charges for violence against women. That one is a fact.
 
Bill Williams said:
Oh vey. Yes, that's what one wants out of a prosecutor. Being kind and polite. During the trial in 2009, Mignini was neither kind nor polite.

So, maybe citing some facts might put this all in perspective. Mignini STILL insists that Knox and Sollecito were on site during the murders. That is neither kind nor polite. Between Knox and he, they have agreed to at least regard each other as human beings - Knox, especially, not wanting to fall into the trap of demonizing opponents, and devaluing their humanity. She'd had enough experience with people doing that to her.

Still, the facts are these.... the acquiting court, the 2015 Supreme Court Panel was clear.... they entertained that EVEN IF Knox and Sollecito had been at the cottage at the time of the murder, the lack of ANY reliable evidence of either of them in the murder room made the whole thing moot.

In my view, Mignini showed cracks in his own thinking about the murder, showed it in the Netflix documentary. In it, he gave copious and first hand accounting of his own thinking to do with the crime. Towards the end, he, too, entertained the possibility that he might be mistaken, and if so, hoped he could get forgiveness.... or some such thing.

That's not him being kind and polite. That is a man struggling with his own conscience in ruining the lives of two people - and de facto lying to the victim's family as to the manner of their loved one's death.

Meanwhile, Rudy Guede faces new charges for violence against women. That one is a fact.
Click to expand...


The Netflix 'documentary' was heavily pro-Knox and they made no attempt to disguise it. Anything negative Mignini might say was sure to end up on the cutting room floor. Truth is, he was the public prosecutor just doing his job. He impartial, objective and neutral as per his professional ethics, had nothing personal against any of the three defendants. In fact, such is the nature of the job, another prosecutor took over from him, Crini. Criminal law is simple. If a cop can identify that a law has been broken then it really has nothing at all to do with whether they like you or 'think you are innocent'. There are objective criteria for bringing charges. Knox and Sollecito were not even charged until about eight months after the crime. You can't charge someone without probable cause or a reasonable prospect of success in taking it to court; nothing to do with one person's 'opinion'. The idea that someone had it in for the pair on a personal level is a fairy tale.

If Knox had disregarded the pressure from her parents to deny, deny, deny, she could have pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, got out of jail in a relatively short time, it being Europe rather than the USA, then on her release with a clean sheet she could then freely recount what happened that night instead of having to keep up a charade.




.



.
 
Vixen said:
If Knox had disregarded the pressure from her parents to deny, deny, deny, she could have pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, got out of jail in a relatively short time, it being Europe rather than the USA, then on her release with a clean sheet she could then freely recount what happened that night instead of having to keep up a charade.
Click to expand...

So, if you were innocent, you'd plead guilty to a lesser charge anyway. Got it.

Does anyone remember Machiavelli (sp?). This poster sounds just like him.


-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom