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

[AnimalFriendly]

Yes, I did criminology as part of my Psychology degree but only on a basic second-year option level. What I found out is, that studies show that where there are defendants that include a male and a female, juries and courts almost always assume the male is the main perpetrator and the female merely his accessory, so the male gets the tough sentence and the female the lesser one. In addition, juries find it hard to comprehend a female can commit a serious crime, such as premeditated murder so women are more likely to get off (statistics show). However, WHEN females are convicted of serious heinous crimes such as the murder of a child or something as aggravated as the crime against Kercher, they are looked upon more severely and given harsher sentences (and we saw Knox get 28 years). Problem with this case is, it got hijacked by the PR agencies and gung-ho patriotic US politicians and Innocence Project bods who simply assumed Knox must be innocent, mainly IMV because the general public simply don't have the intelligence or imagination to realise that hey, 'Amanda' as they affectionately call her, actually did it! It really isn't some kind of theatre production or some kind of heartwarming WOMAN'S OWN life story; it's a horrible brutal, nasty, vicious and calculating murder of a young woman for psychopathic kicks. It's really quite shocking how gullible the average person is.

Probably because, in the rare number of murders committed by at least 1 male & 1 female, the female IS exactly that. The only case I can even think of off hand is that of Karla Faye Tucker. And she was executed. Some lesser sentence. By the way, both she and her male codefendant committed murder after what started as a burglary. And both had known at least one of their 2 murdered victims for at least 2 years.

Juries don't "find it hard" to comprehend females can commit serious crimes. I've sat on a jury, fairly long-term. I can only hope you haven't.

I recall reading that the one crime women commit as often as men, other than shoplifting, is murdering their own children. No, I don't recall the source for this. But I recall that mothers tend to receive lighter sentences for murdering their children than do fathers. Possibly due to the fallacy of children being seen as the "property" of those who gave birth to them. And of course nobody in their right mind would harm their own property. OTOH, women tend to get harsher sentences than do men for the murder of their spouse.

This case wasn't hijacked by PR agencIES. I only know of one & it closed over a decade ago. The prosecutors were who blatantly tried to steer negative media coverage toward Knox & Sollecito.

Gung-ho patriotic US policiticans? Like who? Name them.

Innocence Project "bods"? What even are those? IP case workers don't "assume" anyone is innocent. They get thousands of inquiries and can only get involved in a tiny percentage. It stands to reason they take on cases where there is strong evidence of innocence. And even then, the people making up the IP network are human and make mistakes. Like with, IMO, the LA group working with Scott Peterson.

"'Amanda' as they "affectionately" call her?? Amanda is her first name. What, pray tell, is affectionate about calling her that? Is referring to her as "Foxy Knox" as sign of affection?

A lot of people are gullible. But what is way more shocking are people with some inexplicable confidence in their own (lack of) intelligence. Because intelligence has to include a willingness to recognize confirmation bias. And then be willing to step outside of one's mental comfort zones and actually challenge what you've convinced yourself you know.

 

[acbytesla]

Probably because, in the rare number of murders committed by at least 1 male & 1 female, the female IS exactly that. The only case I can even think of off hand is that of Karla Faye Tucker. And she was executed. Some lesser sentence. By the way, both she and her male codefendant committed murder after what started as a burglary. And both had known at least one of their 2 murdered victims for at least 2 years.

Juries don't "find it hard" to comprehend females can commit serious crimes. I've sat on a jury, fairly long-term. I can only hope you haven't.

I recall reading that the one crime women commit as often as men, other than shoplifting, is murdering their own children. No, I don't recall the source for this. But I recall that mothers tend to receive lighter sentences for murdering their children than do fathers. Possibly due to the fallacy of children being seen as the "property" of those who gave birth to them. And of course nobody in their right mind would harm their own property. OTOH, women tend to get harsher sentences than do men for the murder of their spouse.

This case wasn't hijacked by PR agencIES. I only know of one & it closed over a decade ago. The prosecutors were who blatantly tried to steer negative media coverage toward Knox & Sollecito.

Gung-ho patriotic US policiticans? Like who? Name them.

Innocence Project "bods"? What even are those? IP case workers don't "assume" anyone is innocent. They get thousands of inquiries and can only get involved in a tiny percentage. It stands to reason they take on cases where there is strong evidence of innocence. And even then, the people making up the IP network are human and make mistakes. Like with, IMO, the LA group working with Scott Peterson.

"'Amanda' as they "affectionately" call her?? Amanda is her first name. What, pray tell, is affectionate about calling her that? Is referring to her as "Foxy Knox" as sign of affection?

A lot of people are gullible. But what is way more shocking are people with some inexplicable confidence in their own (lack of) intelligence. Because intelligence has to include a willingness to recognize confirmation bias. And then be willing to step outside of one's mental comfort zones and actually challenge what you've convinced yourself you know.

Very good. Particularly, the last paragraph.

We must question everything. Especially ourselves. Is what we know correct? Have I been thinking about it incorrectly? I very much thought Amanda was guilty. Until I really thought about it. The evidence for her and Raffaele's involvement is pathetic.

 

[Welshman]

Probably because, in the rare number of murders committed by at least 1 male & 1 female, the female IS exactly that. The only case I can even think of off hand is that of Karla Faye Tucker. And she was executed. Some lesser sentence. By the way, both she and her male codefendant committed murder after what started as a burglary. And both had known at least one of their 2 murdered victims for at least 2 years.

Juries don't "find it hard" to comprehend females can commit serious crimes. I've sat on a jury, fairly long-term. I can only hope you haven't.

I recall reading that the one crime women commit as often as men, other than shoplifting, is murdering their own children. No, I don't recall the source for this. But I recall that mothers tend to receive lighter sentences for murdering their children than do fathers. Possibly due to the fallacy of children being seen as the "property" of those who gave birth to them. And of course nobody in their right mind would harm their own property. OTOH, women tend to get harsher sentences than do men for the murder of their spouse.

This case wasn't hijacked by PR agencIES. I only know of one & it closed over a decade ago. The prosecutors were who blatantly tried to steer negative media coverage toward Knox & Sollecito.

Gung-ho patriotic US policiticans? Like who? Name them.

Innocence Project "bods"? What even are those? IP case workers don't "assume" anyone is innocent. They get thousands of inquiries and can only get involved in a tiny percentage. It stands to reason they take on cases where there is strong evidence of innocence. And even then, the people making up the IP network are human and make mistakes. Like with, IMO, the LA group working with Scott Peterson.

"'Amanda' as they "affectionately" call her?? Amanda is her first name. What, pray tell, is affectionate about calling her that? Is referring to her as "Foxy Knox" as sign of affection?

A lot of people are gullible. But what is way more shocking are people with some inexplicable confidence in their own (lack of) intelligence. Because intelligence has to include a willingness to recognize confirmation bias. And then be willing to step outside of one's mental comfort zones and actually challenge what you've convinced yourself you know.

Vixen and other members of TJMK complain about the influence of PR whilst acting as paid for PR agents for the prosecution and the actual murderer Guede.

 

[Stacyhs]

Very good. Particularly, the last paragraph.

We must question everything. Especially ourselves. Is what we know correct? Have I been thinking about it incorrectly? I very much thought Amanda was guilty. Until I really thought about it. The evidence for her and Raffaele's involvement is pathetic.

Exactly. I changed my mind from guilty to innocent only after reading up on the evidence and learning about what DNA can and can't tell us.

 

[Stacyhs]

Vixen and other members of TJMK complain about the influence of PR whilst acting as paid for PR agents for the prosecution and the actual murderer Guede.

Let's not get carried away and do the same thing they do by making unsupported allegations like being "paid for PR agents for the prosecution and actual murderer Guede." They spread enough verified mis-and disinformation for free.

 

[Welshman]

Let's not get carried away and do the same thing they do by making unsupported allegations like being "paid for PR agents for the prosecution and actual murderer Guede." They spread enough verified mis-and disinformation for free.

Vixen and other members of TJMK go to such lengths to defend corrupt police/prosecutors who committed numerous abuses in the case of Amanda and Raffaele and in other instances, I feel it is reasonable to assume TJMK is funded by the prosecution. Even if TJMK is not funded by the prosecution, by slavishly defending the prosecution and are prepared to lie to do this eg the falsehood the notion Amanda was targeted by a rogue prosecutor Mignini is a myth when this is clearly not the case, they are performing PR for the prosecution.

 

[Stacyhs]

Vixen and other members of TJMK go to such lengths to defend corrupt police/prosecutors who committed numerous abuses in the case of Amanda and Raffaele and in other instances, I feel it is reasonable to assume TJMK is funded by the prosecution. Even if TJMK is not funded by the prosecution, by slavishly defending the prosecution and are prepared to lie to do this eg the falsehood the notion Amanda was targeted by a rogue prosecutor Mignini is a myth when this is clearly not the case, they are performing PR for the prosecution.

You can 'feel' whatever you like but you're still making accusations with zero evidence.
Common sense should tell you that "the prosecution" is not funding a site concerning a 17-year-old murder that definitively ended over 10 years ago.
Is it possible that someone at TJMK had some insider connection to the police/prosecution during the trials? I wouldn't be surprised at all. But to claim they were being funded by them is just going a bit too far into conspiracy thinking for me.

 

[acbytesla]

Vixen and other members of TJMK go to such lengths to defend corrupt police/prosecutors who committed numerous abuses in the case of Amanda and Raffaele and in other instances, I feel it is reasonable to assume TJMK is funded by the prosecution. Even if TJMK is not funded by the prosecution, by slavishly defending the prosecution and are prepared to lie to do this eg the falsehood the notion Amanda was targeted by a rogue prosecutor Mignini is a myth when this is clearly not the case, they are performing PR for the prosecution.

You can 'feel' whatever you like but you're still making accusations with zero evidence.
Common sense should tell you that "the prosecution" is not funding a site concerning a 17-year-old murder that definitively ended over 10 years ago.
Is it possible that someone at TJMK had some insider connection to the police/prosecution during the trials? I wouldn't be surprised at all. But to claim they were being funded by them is just going a bit too far into conspiracy thinking for me.

Yea, I don't buy it either.

This is just people that got obsessed early on and became bound to their earliest perception. They allowed every piece of information to persuade them more and dismissed anything that threatened their original view. This is a very common phenomenon.

As a salesman, I found it close to impossible to persuade prospects to move away from their present supplier. The worst thing I could say was that they were wrong in any way. This is really no different. The more they defend a particular position, the more they hang on to it.

 

[Stacyhs]

Yea, I don't buy it either.

This is just people that got obsessed early on and became bound to their earliest perception. They allowed every piece of information to persuade them more and dismissed anything that threatened their original view. This is a very common phenomenon.

As a salesman, I found it close to impossible to persuade prospects to move away from their present supplier. The worst thing I could say was that they were wrong in any way. This is really no different. The more they defend a particular position, the more they hang on to it.

100% agree. That, coupled with some people's narcissistic inability to admit being wrong.

 

[AmyStrange]

100% agree. That, coupled with some people's narcissistic inability to admit being wrong.

What I don't understand is what their end game is. Are they trying to convince us that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, because they're doing damn a lousy job of it.

How do we even know Vixen isn't more than one person sharing the same user ID?

Yeah, I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it sure would explain some of repetitive post claiming the same thing over and over again, even after they've been debunked over and over again, but that's just my opinion.

You know the rest.

 

[Mojo]

Possibly, by inserting the gif, Vixen is telling us that she is making a joke and that it is very funny.

If she needed to do that, it probably isn't.

 

[Welshman]

What I don't understand is what their end game is. Are they trying to convince us that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, because they're doing damn a lousy job of it.

How do we even know Vixen isn't more than one person sharing the same user ID?

Yeah, I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it sure would explain some of repetitive post claiming the same thing over and over again, even after they've been debunked over and over again, but that's just my opinion.

You know the rest.

A question I ask is why resort to the same lies over and over again if the case against Amanda and Raffaele was a slam dunk. If more than one person is posting under the same user name, is it possible they don't check what other persons are posting which explains why debunked arguments are repeated constantly. The view was expressed that previous poster Machiavelli was different people using the same user name.

 

[AmyStrange]

A question I ask is why resort to the same lies over and over again if the case against Amanda and Raffaele was a slam dunk. If more than one person is posting under the same user name, is it possible they don't check what other persons are posting which explains why debunked arguments are repeated constantly. The view was expressed that previous poster Machiavelli was different people using the same user name.

I agree with your question about resorting to lies instead of providing slam dunk evidence, but I was also around when Machiavelli was posting and even had private conversations with him.

I don't think he had multiple posters using his user ID, but then again, I could be wrong.

The biggest difference is that he didn't care if Amanda or Raffaele were guilty. He just liked to argue.

 

[Bill Williams]

What I don't understand is what their end game is.
Are they trying to convince us that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, because they're doing damn a lousy job of it.
How do we even know Vixen isn't more than one person sharing the same user ID?

Yeah, I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it sure would explain some of repetitive post claiming the same thing over and over again, even after they've been debunked over and over again, but that's just my opinion.

You know the rest.

This is the point and has always been the point.

In the length and breadth of this service, going way back to when it was James Randi's skeptic's forum, I have met one, just one, person who'd been a prolific poster of innocence who'd turned at some point into being agnostic - not a guilter, but agnostic. I forget the reason she posted for this, but was quite articulate at the time.

But as experienced, resorting to continual tropes on a Ferris wheel, which get disproven, with citations, then a while later the trope comes around among the same posters, as if it hadn't long since been dealt with....

You know the rest.

 

[TomG]

Here's a link that was posted on the Reddit forum. It might be of interest.

Storie, misteri ed orrori dal Mostro di Firenze ad Amanda Knox. Renovatio 21 intervista il giudice Mignini

Perugia, pomeriggio del 1° settembre 2025. Renovatio 21 intervista un uomo che è passato attraverso, cercando di mettervi ordine, a due delle storie più oscure dell’Italia repubblicana: il mostro di Firenze e l’omicidio di Meredith Kercher. Due immani buchi neri nella coscienza pubblica...

www.renovatio21.com

Hoots

 

[Stacyhs]

Here's a link that was posted on the Reddit forum. It might be of interest.

Storie, misteri ed orrori dal Mostro di Firenze ad Amanda Knox. Renovatio 21 intervista il giudice Mignini

Perugia, pomeriggio del 1° settembre 2025. Renovatio 21 intervista un uomo che è passato attraverso, cercando di mettervi ordine, a due delle storie più oscure dell’Italia repubblicana: il mostro di Firenze e l’omicidio di Meredith Kercher. Due immani buchi neri nella coscienza pubblica...

www.renovatio21.com

Hoots

Mignini comes across as an obnoxious, arrogant, puffed-up narcissist. Apparently, the problem with the Kercher case was the American press and our lack of culture:

Over time, I've come to understand how Americans are and how they think, strengthened by my many experiences. They tend to say that whatever they do is right—unlike us Italians, who are self-destructive—and they pretend to teach others. If they had as much culture as their economic and military power, they would truly be the best, but in reality, culturally, they are a disaster.

On the Meredith case, I saw the gap with the English, who, while they may be Anglo-Saxon, are still European. You can reason with the English. Americans have this characteristic: they take out their own flaws, which they don't realize, on others. I remember that during the Kercher trial, on Via Mazzini, I met an American journalist who asked me a few questions and at a certain point asked: "What do you think of witches?" "Witches? What are you saying?"

In Perugia, historically, this figure wasn't felt at all. We have this Etruscan background, and in Meredith's case it manifested itself because we have a very strong cult of the dead. We have a devotion to them, because we commemorate them on November 2nd. [Meredith was killed on the night of November 1st, and not, as is commonly believed, on Halloween night, which is October 31st.] She replied: "In America they told me that." "In America they can tell you whatever they want, but here we are in Perugia, not in a city in Massachusetts!" She was offended because I hit the nail on the head.

Q: Perhaps he was right to reiterate certain concepts

Of course! Americans need to be humiliated, benevolently, or even politely, because they don't understand.

I notice how he doesn't mention that he was the one who claimed the murder was supposed to be a "sacrificial rite" that was supposed to take place on Halloween night! He blames everyone but himself.

In my opinion, they hoped—but there was no chance—that the trial would be transferred to America. Except that there were no legal grounds for doing so, so they tried to attack, undermine, and delegitimize the entire Italian legal system. They truly did something disgraceful.

That's ridiculous. Not once did I see anyone in the US suggest that.

It's a trial where there were several anomalies. I'll tell you one, just to give you an example: the expert report hadn't been filed yet, and an Irish journalist came to me—you had to be careful, because the Irish were enemies of the English, therefore against the investigation, and friends of the Americans—and he secretly recorded me. But when you record, you also record yourself, and he blurted out that the expert report supported the defense's argument. To which I said, "Excuse me, but how did you know that? I don't know anything about it. It wasn't filed." He replied that it was just rumors he'd heard. "No, you're not telling me the truth." Then they removed that because they hoped to put me in trouble by thinking I might let slip something. Then there are other errors that border on the unbelievable.

The Irish didn't want the investigation because they hated the English? The reporter wanted to get him in trouble? Mignini really is paranoid and sees himself as a victim.

 

[AmyStrange]

The Irish didn't want the investigation because they hated the English? The reporter wanted to get him in trouble? Mignini really is paranoid and sees himself as a victim.

I wonder how many innocent people are in jail right now because of him.

 

[TomG]

Mignini said-

"Of course! Americans need to be humiliated, benevolently, or even politely, because they don't understand."

I wonder how deep that goes?

His opinions on the shutters, alleged slander and the bra-clasp are no better presented than those presented on other forums, ie, that they are unsustainable on their own and depend on other equally dubious evidence to gain any traction. I don't believe his explanation about the failure to take the body temperature for one moment, either. Mignini was in charge; if he didn't realise the urgency of taking the body temperature, then he was incompetent. It's clear from the interview that he needs to foist that incompetence onto others. It's the fact that it's all presented with such faux eloquence that's most irritating, as though we're all too stupid to see through the mask.

Hoots

 

[Stacyhs]

More from Mignini's pity-party interview:

That's right. I must also say that no one expected the Fifth Section's ruling, where some errors can be found. I could cite a few, such as that of the homeless man Antonio Curatolo. The homeless man is dismissed as unreliable. But just because he's a homeless man and a poor man?

Ummmmm....no. He was deemed unreliable because he described Halloween night, not the night of the murder and admitted being on heroin at the time. Then he tries to blame it on "Calvinist" doctrine. Odd as I had no idea the Marasca and Bruno were Calvinists!

Mignini on the "staged break-in""

Yes! I did the math. The two shutters were straining against the jamb due to the temperature changes, and they were less than twenty centimeters apart. How could this guy from the courtyard in front of the highest window have hit that narrow space with a stone? I ordered the police to check the wall for signs of a slide. They found nothing. Then I began to think the whole thing was staged, and anyone who simulates it is likely someone who is afraid of being involved, because he frequents or lives in the house.

How dishonest of him. He doesn't mention that the shutters could be opened just by standing on the grate below and reaching up. Nor does he mention that the shutters could have been pulled shut from within afterwards so no one could see him rummaging through the room or notice the broken glass.

Mignini has the audacity to claim HE ordered the body temperature taken at the cottage when, in reality, he refused Lalli permission to do so as Lalli testified. "Doctor" is referring to Mignini, not Lalli:

I ordered the medical examiner to take the body's temperature. He came to me and said, "No, doctor, for goodness sake!" "But what for goodness sake?!" "Because there's a risk of contamination." At that point I told him, "You do the tests, but let me know immediately because he has to go and check." I waited, but then I gave the order.

The SC did not agree that his "expert assessment" of the TOD and placed it at "between 9 and 10:13 PM":

Luckily, I also conducted an expert assessment on the time of death, and I conducted expert assessments during the investigation as well.

His crap doesn't end there. Once again, he blames "the Americans" for "throwing out some amazing nonsense" about Knox's false confession and that "Amanda never confessed". Odd, because he certainly presented it as a confession.

They invented the idea of contamination. This evidence remained inside the seized house, and Sollecito was in jail. How did Sollecito's haplotype end up on the bra clasp? You explain it to me.

"Invented"? LOL. Mignini dishonestly doesn't mention the 46 days in-between when multiple people rummaged through the cottage. Since he admits he needs it explained to him, I suggest he watch the collection video again with someone who can explain it to him in simple terms.

Mignini then goes on to hint that there is some "news" coming possibly about evidence of others being at the crime. I suspect this is as reliable as Quennell's predictions of an upcoming apology from Raffaele and the overturning of Marasca any day now...

He says Sollecito's attitude is one of bitterness and resentment and he acts like "someone convicted":

Sollecito, on the other hand, behaved like a convicted felon, very resentful. He still has a hostile attitude toward me. And I think he doesn't understand that he got lucky in the end. It worked out for both of them. They didn't understand. I'll tell you one thing. Rudy's summary trial saved them.

Has it occurred to this idiot that Sollecito is still TREATED like a convicted felon? He goes on to say he now "trusts" Amanda but not Raffaele. I mean, how DARE Raffaele not be as forgiving of him as Amanda?

More of his narcissism:

What I'd like to make clear is that when I walk down the street and people meet me—and it's rare to do so with a public prosecutor—they ask if they can shake my hand. People I don't even know. This means people know I don't care about anyone's face, perhaps also because I'm Catholic. After all, I am a magistrate of the Italian Republic.

They come up to him, big strong, burly men, with tears in their eyes and thank him for saving them from criminals like the world has never seen before............

Mignini says he became good friends with one American reporter. Ahem..cough...Barbie...cough cough.....

I didn't think much of Mignini before reading this interview and I think even less of him now.

 

[Vixen]

It's worth noting that it was at least thirty-eight different judges and lay judges who did the judging of the merits, the appeals and the convictions. It's just as well it wasn't Mignini or the other two prosecutors (equally senior as Mignini) who were responsible!