In your world, innocent people are perfect, they never make mistakes, they never forget exactly what time some minor occurred. Do you believe that Jesus stands behind the innocent in interrogation rooms?
Or perhaps it's much simpler. Maybe you believe that innocent people are never arrested. Especially in a place like Perugia, where the cops have an incredible ability to pick out the guilty from the slightest of clues.
In this case, investigator Giobbi determined that Amanda and Raffaele were guilty from:
1. Amanda broke down the day after the murder when Giobbi said he was going next door to ask the neighbors if they had witnessed anything on the night of the murder.
2. When Giobbi asked Amanda to follow him into the cottage, she swiveled her hips.
3. When Giobbi contacted Raffaele, he was having a pizza with Amanda.
The last was the clincher that they had committed the murder together.
Can you explain how Giobbi came to the conclusion the couple was guilty without invoking magic or angels?
.
My world? Have I made any reference to my world? I don't know what you're referring to.
As regards remembering exact times in alibis, you didn't read my prior post where after listing several items which form part of Amanda's alibi, I said: "
I would expect that my significant other would remember those events in more or less the same order and at the appropriate timing in the evening."
I think that police should be equally suspicious of alibis which don't coincide at all, as of alibis which fit too perfectly.
I made no reference in my prior post to Giobbi's supposed incriminating pizza or Amanda's swivelling hips, but rather the fact that Amanda's alibi includes:
- a heart-to-heart discussion with Raffaele about his mother's suicide, a suicide which he denied explicitly in one of his brief uncontested declarations to the court
- Raffaele's official alibi has Amanda leaving his flat between 9 p.m. and 1 a.m. (his unofficial prison diary version has her leaving the cottage a shorter period of time). Her alibi has her in the flat with Raffaele all evening and night.
- Amanda's alibi has her showering with Raffaele, and him cleaning her ears. He believes that happened on a prior night.
- The pipe break and the mop movements the next day have introduced differences in their stories (when the police arrived was Raffaele's place already cleaned up?)
- Raffaele remembered a phone call or a message from his father at around 11 p.m. Amanda doesn't include this (good sense, the message didn't arrive until the next day around 6 a.m.)
I don't think anyone really believes that Amanda was arrested for eating pizza or buying underwear.
From your list of Giobbi's supposed proof of Amanda's and Raffaele's guilt, can you tell us which points were used in the courtroom to arrive at the guilty verdict?
==================
What I don't understand is why you think that I believe that innocent people are never arrested. Have you caught any posts of mine on other sites which point in that direction? Here I've certainly never said anything of that sort.
Haven't you heard of Wenatchee?
==================
As for Jesus, I don't understand you introducing Him here.
Get a hold of yourself, man. You asked questions about spouses/significant others remembering or having conflicting alibis. I answered, with references to Amanda's and Raffaele's alibis.
You challenged us to prove that Amanda was the one who introduced Patrick's name in the 5 November 2007. We did.
The Giobbi comments may have been of interest back at the start of this case. However, what counts now is real evidence which was presented in court, and how it is contested.
I'm more concerned about conflicting alibis than pizza.
I'm more concerned about DNA evidence than swivelling hips.
