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

[AmyStrange]

I beg your pardon! Now it's behind a paywall for me too! Maybe this works:

https://www.agi.it/cronaca/news/2025-03-28/meredith-ex-pm-mignini-mie-valutazioni-sono-quelle-2011-30643175/

This is what I could get from it, including what I think is a story about Rudy Guede in the last quote, but I think I'm wrong---22 years-old doesn't sound like Guede:

Perugia, 28 March 2025 – "I asked for Amanda Knox to be convicted at the trial in 2011, and since then I have received many rumors; but I keep them to myself: my assessments are those of 2011": this was stated by Giuliano Mignini, the former prosecutor who coordinated the investigation and represented the prosecution at the trial for the murder in Perugia of Meredith Kerchner, commenting on 'Uno Mattina' on Rai 1 the recent meeting with the young American, definitively acquitted in the Supreme Court in 2019

"She came to me with an olive branch," Mignini said. And again: "I didn't want to welcome her but then I accepted, something like this had never happened to me: she wanted to talk to me face to face and I appreciated her courage and frankness. This girl has matured; she has become a wife and mother of two children." Amanda, now 37, wrote in her book 'Free' that Mignini did not admit that he had made a mistake as she had hoped but only told her that she was "not the person she thought she was pursuing." "I came out of the trial in 2011 and I cannot go back from a judicial statement," explained the former prosecutor, recalling that "in this trial there was immense media pressure."

She added that, despite being declared innocent, she never had the chance to return to live her life: the paparazzi nightmare also marked her marriage to Chris Robinson, not forgetting the death threats. "There was always an implied meaning like, 'Look, Amanda lives her life while Meredith is dead,'" he explained. And when she became pregnant with her daughter Eureka, 3 years old, she was tormented by the fear that the shadow of her past would weigh on the little girl. Even at the time, she was given messages like, "I hope your daughter dies so you know what Meredith's mother felt."

Perugia, 19 March 2025 – Life after prison, the battle to prove her innocence and the difficulties of reintegrating into society: Amanda Knox tells her story in a new autobiography, 'Free: My Search for Meaning' to be released on 25 March. In 2007 she was accused, together with her then-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, of the murder in Perugia of English student and roommate Meredith Kercher; after a conviction in 2009 she was acquitted in 2011.

In an interview with People ahead of the book's release, Knox, 37, said that after spending four years in prison in Italy, the only thing he wanted was to return to a normal life and anonymity in Seattle. This was not possible, "not only because of the paparazzi always on their heels or the constant death threats," he explained, "but also because I was the girl accused of murder, for better or worse that would forever be my legacy."

Foligno, April 1, 2025 - A young man from Foligno, already subject to the measure of the prohibition of approaching his ex-girlfriend (the latter victim of a series of conducts integrating the crimes of private violence, personal injury, damage and threats), is now under house arrest. From the investigations of the Foligno police station - under the constant coordination of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Spoleto - it emerged that both during and at the end of the romantic relationship, the 22-year-old, obsessed with jealousy, had forced the girl to allow him to control her chats. In another episode, however, he had prevented her from attending a company dinner. The situation had degenerated to the point that, on some occasions, he had gone so far as to threaten her with death and physically assault her, causing injuries for which the woman had needed medical attention. Even after the execution of the precautionary measure of the prohibition of approach, the young man, after an initial period of observance of the prohibition, continued with his conduct, violating the measure and threatening her. The circumstance generated a state of anxiety and fear in the victim that led her to ask the police for help. Hence the arrest.

-

 

[AmyStrange]

I was going to post the proof from the 2015 motivations report, but I'm getting tired in reposting and reposting it, only to have Vixen and other guilters ignore what the acquitting court actually wrote.

Chapter 9 of their report, said that they were going to list 'facts alleged by the defence', as well as 'facts alleged by the prosecution,' in that case the Crini prosecution. The ISC panel then listed those 'facts' as alleged.... one of which was the 'fact' that Knox and Sollecito had been there that night, at the time of the murder.

They then concluded their report saying that, regardless of it being alleged that they'd been there, that 'even if what the prosecution alleged had been true', that that still did not overcome the real issue - that no forensic evidence of either of the accused, save for Guede, was found in the murder room itself. They then concluded that that should have been an insurmountable barrier to the conviction which the Nencini court had made.... so, then, the 2015 ISC overturned the conviction, acquitting the pair.

There. Reposted for the umpteenth time, only to be ignored again, because guilters cannot read the plain text of the motivations report, or that they simply quote out of context from the 'list' that the acquitting court had made of the 'prosecution facts'.

Which, even if true, still was not enough to have convicted RS and/or RS.

Exactly and thank you for your post.

Guiltersplaining is almost as bad as (if not worse than) the fat clown's maga weirdoes' trumpsplaining.

Either way, guilters are just as willfully stupid and ignorant as them.


-

 

[Numbers]

Posters and readers here may wonder what has happened to the ECHR case Sollecito v. Italy, which was lodged with the ECHR 22 December 2017 and Communicated to Italy 1 February 2022*. My best guess is that it is trapped among the large number of pending ECHR applications and communicated cases.

At the end of 2024, the ECHR had over 60,300 pending cases/applications, over 28,700 assigned to be examined by a judicial tribunal, and over 36,800 that had completed judicial judgment or decision.** Of the pending ECHR cases, Italy had 1342 cases awaiting examination by a judicial tribunal and 727 that had been communicated but not yet assigned to a judicial examination.*** Sollecito v. Italy is among those 2069 cases. The grand total of cases for all the CoE states plus former CoE state Russia in a similar position is 58,860. (The 60,330 pending cases include those 58,860 cases and other cases ruled admissible but not yet communicated as well as over 570 cases from Poland awaiting information from the Polish government.)

* https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-215997

** https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/echr/viz/Analysis_statistics/Overview
Overview tab

*** https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/echr/viz/Analysis_statistics/Overview
Caseload tab

 

[AmyStrange]

It might provide comfort to you to blame the police but you are simply deluding yourself.

Nope. It doesn't provide any comfort for me one bit, but that's typical of you. Giving your opinion from assumptions and nothing else. Very typical.

As a matter of fact, I admire law enforcement very much, but anyone who thinks there aren't any idiots amongst them is also one too.


-

 

[AmyStrange]

Mignini was present when Knox broke down over the knives. We are not party to what she told hm but Mignini hints she confessed. Knox was also captured on a police wire tap telling her mother, Edda, 'I cannot lie, I was there'.

As to your comments about the police, yes, the police face a lot of hatred as the person being arrested always blames the person arresting them, or the prosecutor or the judge. IMV it is not very helpful to blame the police for the situation the three of them found themselves in. It demonstrates poor critical skills.

Look who's talking... bwahahahaha


-

 

[Vixen]

Nope. It doesn't provide any comfort for me one bit, but that's typical of you. Giving your opinion from assumptions and nothing else. Very typical.

As a matter of fact, I admire law enforcement very much, but anyone who thinks there aren't any idiots amongst them is also one too.


-

You brought up the issue of the police. You claim police only arrested Lumumba because they were idiots. To my mind that is the same reasoning people adopt - as I tried to explain but there seems to be a massive communications gulf here - when they get a parking ticket and blame the traffic warden. Do you really believe Knox was arrested under suspicion of murder because 'the police were stupid' or 'the prosecution had it in for her'. If that is how you rationalise the arrests then indeed you are simply comforting yourself instead of facing reality. As if a fact changes just because you are opposed to it.

 

[AmyStrange]

You brought up the issue of the police. You claim police only arrested Lumumba because they were idiots. To my mind that is the same reasoning people adopt - as I tried to explain but there seems to be a massive communications gulf here - when they get a parking ticket and blame the traffic warden. Do you really believe Knox was arrested under suspicion of murder because 'the police were stupid' or 'the prosecution had it in for her'. If that is how you rationalise the arrests then indeed you are simply comforting yourself instead of facing reality. As if a fact changes just because you are opposed to it.

Thanks for helping me to prove my point.


-

 

[Stacyhs]

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. )

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.



.

Let's do the Time Warp again with the same old nonsense. Let's start with this one:

1. "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."

Poor choice of comparisons, Vixen as neither Kohberger nor Arias had a plausible and reasonable reason to turn off their phones other than to conceal their whereabouts. But let's look at the events surrounding R and A turning off theirs:

8:18: Lumumba sends text to Amanda
8:38: Knox reads and replies then turns off phone.
Knox testimony on why she turned off her phone: "Because I didn't want to be called back, to go to work. I didn't want to be disturbed."


8:40-8:45: Jovana Popovic testifies she dropped by RS's apartment to tell him she no longer needs a ride to the station.


8:43: Sollecito receives call from father lasting 3 min and 40sec. then turns off phone.

Within 5 minutes both RS and AK find themselves with an unexpected free night. So, Knox decides "Let's go find that guy...what's his name... I met briefly a couple times, and you've never met, Raf, and force my roommate of 6 weeks to have sex with us and kill her if she doesn't!"


2. "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."


Sheesh. What makes you think that was even an option? The prosecution alleged she wielded the murder weapon, not Sollecito, not Guede. Why? Because dumb++++ Stefanoni claimed she found Kercher's DNA on the blade and Knox's DNA on the handle. You really think Mignini was going to let her plead to manslaughter if possible?

If Knox HAD been able to plead down, then she'd be a convicted killer for the rest of her life and not exonerated. Tell you what, when YOU'VE been wrongly accused of a murder and decide to plead down to manslaughter, then you can criticize Knox and not before.

3. " As it it is, the JUDICIAL 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. "

FTFY. Judicial facts and actual facts can be two different things which is why you always fall back on the judicial fact.
There is NO forensic evidence or witness evidence placing her in the cottage that night. That is ACTUAL FACT. But you're not interested in actual fact because it undermines your beliefs.

4. "Meredith Kercher's blood on her hands"

There is NO forensic evidence proving she had any blood on her hands. NONE. That is an ACTUAL FACT which is why neither you nor anyone else can produce a single piece of scientific evidence that proves that. Which is why you won't now, either.

5. " and covering up for Guede"

Riiiiiiiiight....because pointing out his crap in the toilet and his bloody footprint to the police is "covering" for him. Leaving his bloody shoeprints in the hallway in MK's bedroom, and his bloody handprint under her body are all ways she was "covering" for him. All that while also mopping down the scene with bleach! It's absurd.

6. "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."

You've finally said something that makes sense.

 

[Vixen]

Let's do the Time Warp again with the same old nonsense. Let's start with this one:

1. "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."

Poor choice of comparisons, Vixen as neither Kohberger nor Arias had a plausible and reasonable reason to turn off their phones other than to conceal their whereabouts. But let's look at the events surrounding R and A turning off theirs:

8:18: Lumumba sends text to Amanda
8:38: Knox reads and replies then turns off phone.
Knox testimony on why she turned off her phone: "Because I didn't want to be called back, to go to work. I didn't want to be disturbed."


8:40-8:45: Jovana Popovic testifies she dropped by RS's apartment to tell him she no longer needs a ride to the station.


8:43: Sollecito receives call from father lasting 3 min and 40sec. then turns off phone.

Within 5 minutes both RS and AK find themselves with an unexpected free night. So, Knox decides "Let's go find that guy...what's his name... I met briefly a couple times, and you've never met, Raf, and force my roommate of 6 weeks to have sex with us and kill her if she doesn't!"


2. "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."


Sheesh. What makes you think that was even an option? The prosecution alleged she wielded the murder weapon, not Sollecito, not Guede. Why? Because dumb++++ Stefanoni claimed she found Kercher's DNA on the blade and Knox's DNA on the handle. You really think Mignini was going to let her plead to manslaughter if possible?

If Knox HAD been able to plead down, then she'd be a convicted killer for the rest of her life and not exonerated. Tell you what, when YOU'VE been wrongly accused of a murder and decide to plead down to manslaughter, then you can criticize Knox and not before.

3. " As it it is, the JUDICIAL 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. "

FTFY. Judicial facts and actual facts can be two different things which is why you always fall back on the judicial fact.
There is NO forensic evidence or witness evidence placing her in the cottage that night. That is ACTUAL FACT. But you're not interested in actual fact because it undermines your beliefs.

4. "Meredith Kercher's blood on her hands"

There is NO forensic evidence proving she had any blood on her hands. NONE. That is an ACTUAL FACT which is why neither you nor anyone else can produce a single piece of scientific evidence that proves that. Which is why you won't now, either.

5. " and covering up for Guede"

Riiiiiiiiight....because pointing out his crap in the toilet and his bloody footprint to the police is "covering" for him. Leaving his bloody shoeprints in the hallway in MK's bedroom, and his bloody handprint under her body are all ways she was "covering" for him. All that while also mopping down the scene with bleach! It's absurd.

6. "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."

You've finally said something that makes sense.

That is not what Massei, the Appeal Court or the final Supreme Courts say.







.

 

[AmyStrange]

That is not what Massei, the Appeal Court or the final Supreme Courts say.

Thanks for once again helping me to prove my point.


-

 

[Stacyhs]

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.


.

1. "You forget, Mignini saw the murder scene with his own eyes"

You forget, Mignini also admitted he began to suspect it was an "inside job" and a woman since "only a woman would cover the body" at the murder scene. You forget that he admitted suspecting Knox because she wasn't acting sufficiently upset outside the cottage and was "inappropriately" kissing her boyfriend. Since the other two had solid alibis quickly established, who do you think that left?

We've also seen the murder scene with our own eyes via the police videos and photos.

2. "knows all about the evidence that was disallowed"

Exactly WHAT evidence was disallowed? You're implying, without evidence, that there was inculpatory evidence that he knows about but no one else does.

3. " he was there when she had a breakdown and confessed."

Right...because he was just so kindly sitting there, not questioning her at all, when she suddenly "buckled" for no reason and told them what they "knew to be true". She just had to get it all off her chest and tell him what really happened. Only it wasn't what really happened at all, was it?

4. "He knows, you know.

Yes, he's beginning to. Yes, we do know. I doubt you ever will.

 

[AmyStrange]

Yes, he's beginning to. Yes, we do know. I doubt you ever will.

Exactly and thank you.

If they could step away from ONLY considering things that confirmed their bias and actually considered all their "evidence" with REAL critical thinking skills, they'd probably see the light, but like you said, they probably never will.

Egotism is like that.


-

 

[Stacyhs]

That is not what Massei, the Appeal Court or the final Supreme Courts say.

That's the typical response from you: rather than address what I actually said, he just make some vague claim.

You don't even attempt to dispute that the timing and circumstances of that night provide a rational, logical, and entirely innocent reason for them turning off their phones.

You can't argue with any intelligent reasoning why Mignini would not have charged Knox with the murder when he believed Kercher's DNA was on the knife blade and Knox's was on the handle.

You can't provide a shred of scientific evidence that Kercher's blood was on Knox's hands...which is why Massei (or any court) ever did either. Just like he claimed Knox walked around barefoot in Kercher's blood despite the negative TMB tests.

You can't rationally or logically dispute the points I made regarding Knox "covering up" for Guede which is why you don't and never will.

 

[Stacyhs]

Exactly and thank you.

If they could step away from ONLY considering things that confirmed their bias and actually considered all their "evidence" with REAL critical thinking skills, they'd probably see the light, but like you said, they probably never will.

Egotism is like that.


-

It certainly is. We see it in certain politicians and colpevolisti. A total inability to ever admit being wrong.

 

[AmyStrange]

It certainly is. We see it in certain politicians and colpevolisti. A total inability to ever admit being wrong.

Yup, but let's consider two points that Vixen has ignored or wouldn't answer my question about:

1) They said they allegedly found Amanda's shoe print on a t-shirt under Meredith's body. Now I may be wrong, but why weren't her shoes taken as evidence? The reason is because they weren't found. Now, if true, how can they say it matched her shoes if they couldn't find her shoes?

2) They think Amanda's coerced confession is ALL true, but ignores the fact that it isn't, because Patrick Lumumba had an alibi for when Meredith was killed. That alone made me wonder about her alleged confession right from the start, but Vixen never answered my question about that, proving they only consider things that confirm their bias and nothing else.


-

 

[Welshman]

It is a sign of the gross stupidity of guilters that they expect Amanda to talk about a crime she had no involvement in.

 

[Disbelief]

It has always been the case the burden of proof is on the prosecution. In the context of Mignini knowing - or at least having a jolly good idea of - the culpability of the pair, given Knox' great need to talk but yet her parents turned up and demanded the usual 'deny everything' routine. The point being it is not contributing to Knox' mental health being unable to freely talk about the terrible crimes committed that night, that was the context being discussed. Given the pair premeditated the attack, switching off their phones simultaneously and each carrying a knife to the premises, with Knox hiding Sollecito's kitchen knife in her bag, laying in wait for Mez until she returned home, and with their footprints in luminol, his DNA on the victim's underwear under her body under a sheet, not to mention Sollecito's footprint on the bathmat, it seemed pretty pointless to deny they were ever there. It could be argued Knox and Guede, in their un-fully developed adolescent brains, were cynically led on by Sollecito with his fantasies of killing vampires and his knife fetish - a highly disturbed young man and who showed complete sang-froid throughout the whole process, but having been shut down by Mom, Knox had to play along with the ridiculous, 'I was framed' nonsense.

Had Knox told all, and it was Mignini's perception she wanted to talk, then she and Guede could have been seen as the lesser accomplices to Sollecito's chilling 'icy cold' psychopathy.

Nothing to do with plea deals.


.

And yet, the only one to continue to commit crimes is Guede. Weren't you sure that Knox and Sollecito would "kill again"?

 

[Vixen]

That's the typical response from you: rather than address what I actually said, he just make some vague claim.

You don't even attempt to dispute that the timing and circumstances of that night provide a rational, logical, and entirely innocent reason for them turning off their phones.

You can't argue with any intelligent reasoning why Mignini would not have charged Knox with the murder when he believed Kercher's DNA was on the knife blade and Knox's was on the handle.

You can't provide a shred of scientific evidence that Kercher's blood was on Knox's hands...which is why Massei (or any court) ever did either. Just like he claimed Knox walked around barefoot in Kercher's blood despite the negative TMB tests.

You can't rationally or logically dispute the points I made regarding Knox "covering up" for Guede which is why you don't and never will.

These points have been argued many many times. Honestly, 'debating' with the PIP is like scientists arguing Darwin's Theory with Jehovah's Witnesses. Even with the evidence of the luminol, DNA, blood, strands of fair hair, one such tightly gripped in the deceased hand in rigor mortis, the locked door from the outside, the phones switched off from 8:45 through to 5:00am, the all-night cleaning, the still warm washing machine, the cottage mop going back and forth between the residences, the phone-call to Mom in US early hours before the door was even kicked down, the footprint on the bathmat, Her DNA on the knife hilt, Mez' on the blade, bloody fingerprint on the light swtich, mixed blood on cotton bud box and in the toilet bowl and on the tap, Mez' missing rent money, HER lamp under Mez' bed. But the 'true believers' are convinced that this is the master work of one all-powerful prosecutor.


.

 

[Vixen]

Yup, but let's consider two points that Vixen has ignored or wouldn't answer my question about:

1) They said they allegedly found Amanda's shoe print on a t-shirt under Meredith's body. Now I may be wrong, but why weren't her shoes taken as evidence? The reason is because they weren't found. Now, if true, how can they say it matched her shoes if they couldn't find her shoes?

2) They think Amanda's coerced confession is ALL true, but ignores the fact that it isn't, because Patrick Lumumba had an alibi for when Meredith was killed. That alone made me wonder about her alleged confession right from the start, but Vixen never answered my question about that, proving they only consider things that confirm their bias and nothing else.


-

Well someone was there who took size 37 ladies trainer.



.

 

[Vixen]

It certainly is. We see it in certain politicians and colpevolisti. A total inability to ever admit being wrong.

Oh dear. You really believe that criminal culpability is just a matter of personal opinion. All these hundreds of years of developing a justice system and we still have people loose who think all you have to do is shake your head and deny a criminal trial has any meaning, purpose or function. All that matters is a mob of people forming a fan club and that supersedes the courts.



.