Detectives often know when someone is a perp. There is nothing to stop anyone from thinking whatever they like.
Police often
assume someone is a perp even before any evidence is processed because, you know, their "gut instincts" are so on target! As De Felice so proudly said, they got Knox to 'buckle' and admit to facts they knew to be true...like Lumumba was involved.
If Mignini thought Knox was a suspect from Day 1 - says you the mind-reader - then what are you going to do about it?
I don't need to mind-read.
He stated himself that a) only a female would cover the body, b) it was an 'inside' job, c) Knox's behavior outside the cottage was suspicious, and d) he suspected her on Nov. 3 when she broke down at the cottage.
What protocol has been broken?
Ummm.....how about waiting for the forensic evidence analyses to come back? How about letting the evidence guide the investigation to the suspects instead of being suspect-centered and interpreting the evidence to fit the suspect? As M-B said: "investigative amnesia".
Given she never bothered calling the police
Oh, dear. Could you be any more intellectually dishonest? You know Raffaele called once they discovered the break-in, he knew the emergency number while Knox didn't, and most obviously (except to you), Raffaele spoke Italian. Even the postales said they had to have Raffaele translate for her because they couldn't understand her rudimentary Italian.
and got dressed in her room in the dark (because HER lamp was under Mez' bed!)
Um...
.it was late morning, not night, with natural light from both her window and the hallway along the terrace.
Try as you might, her lamp isn't evidence of anything. It's yet another example of how absolutely everything has to be interpreted as supporting guilt even when there's a plausible and innocent explanation. As often said, if Knox were guilty, as soon as she heard that her lamp was in Kercher's bedroom, all she had to say was "Yes, she asked to borrow it for her desk." Instead, she said she didn't know how it got there....because she didn't. Also, since you think they spent all night staging and cleaning, you'd think she'd notice her lamp wasn't in her room because it was dark then and that was her only artificial light source. But don't let logic stand in the way of your narrative
.and supposedly took a shower, with Sollecito's great bloody footprint on the bathmat, her second within hours, as per her email to everyone in her address book in the early hours of the following Sunday, he carefully scrubbed her from top to bottom.
1) It wasn't Sollecito's. You need to use some logic here:
it that had been Sollecito's they would have removed it and not pointed it out to the police. To think otherwise is illogical and ridiculous.
2) It wasn't "her second within hours, as per her email". This is what her email said:
It was the day after halloween, thursday. I got home and she was still asleep, but after i had taken a shower and was fumbling around the kitchen she emerged from her room with the blood of her costume (vampire) still dripping down her chin.
And
the next morning i woke up around 1030 and after grabbing my few things i left raffael's appartment and walked the five minute walk back to my house to once again take a shower and grab a change of clothes.
That's a shower the morning of Nov. 1 and a shower the morning of Nov. 2. She showered once a day! Maybe that's unusual, so suspicious, where you live?
As well as being up all night mopping up water
Wait. I thought they were up all night at the cottage cleaning up invisible DNA and prints but somehow missing all the intact prints in the kitchen, hallway, and bedrooms, and missing the blood in the bathroom and the bloody print on the mat!
and getting up VERY early after a bank holiday evening to purchase cleaning fluids,
LOL! Oh, Vixen. Referring to Quintavalle, who was completely discredited by Volturno and the lack of any store record showing any purchase of cleaning fluids by anyone, much less Knox, just reeks of "selective amnesia"!
and with both having switched off their phones for the entire duration: why WOULDN'T anyone with an ounce of commons sense find Knox' behaviour suspicious?
Oh, dear. Because most of the things you bring up as evidence are false, were not known Nov. 2-Nov. 5/6, or irrelevant.
....make that make sense.
