Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[quadraginta]

In both the Knox and the Monster of Florence case, Prosecutor Mignini has played the role of Jim Garrison in the Kennedy assassination.

Or perhaps a better analogy, the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA).

The Committee investigated until 1978, and in 1979 issued its final report, concluding that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, probably as a result of a conspiracy.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

In both the Knox and the Monster of Florence case, Prosecutor Mignini has played the role of Jim Garrison in the Kennedy assassination.

That is exactly right. The parallels are striking - fruitcakes with a grandiose need to manufacture criminal fantasies worthy of their talent, and no compunction about destroying innocent lives.

 

[LondonJohn]

It's also quite difficult not to respond when your own posts are remotely commented upon, LOL.


If it is so, it's the "sheerest of sophistry" from the independent experts, who obviously felt the need to avoid using the term "compatible" with regard to the kitchen knife. Presumably that was in order to distinguish it from the "many other knives [which] are more compatible than this one". Maybe those glossing over the difference might want to ask themselves why, unlike many commenting on the case, the experts refused to call the knife "compatible".

The issue of the knife/knives is, to me, a microcosm of the whole investigation. If a murder victim is slashed and stabbed in one specific area of their body (here, the neck), then it's highly unlikely for the wounds to have been made by two separate knives. After all, for two assailants, each of whom is wielding a sharp knife, it's not only physically difficult for both assailants to place a knife at the victim's throat simultaneously - it's also potentially dangerous to the assailants, since they risk stabbing each other in any sort of struggle.

I would therefore argue that if two or more knives were used in the attack on Meredith Kercher, they would have been placed (and subsequently used) on different parts of her body - one at the throat, certainly, but the other(s) in her ribs or back.

From this, it seems to me that the prosecutors followed a classic example of making the evidence fit a theory, when they got back a "positive" result on Sollecito's kitchen knife. The autopsy findings indicated that the two stabbing wounds and the slash wound on Meredith's neck were consistent with being made by the same narrow-bladed, non-serrated knife, but the slash wound - by its very nature - could actually have been made by any non-serrated knife, since it did not fully penetrate the skin and leave a blade profile. Furthermore, the bloody impression of a knife was found on Meredith's sheets - an impression that was compatible with a knife capable of causing all the wounds on Meredith's neck.

Now, common sense dictates that the same narrow-bladed non-serrated knife was responsible for all the neck wounds, and that it was wielded by a single person (whether or not others were restraining Meredith during the attack). But the prosecution now had a knife in their possession which they were convinced was used in the attack, and which furthermore linked to both Knox (DNA on the handle) and to a lesser degree Sollecito (the knife was from his apartment). But they had a problem: this knife was a relatively large, broad-bladed kitchen knife, which was definitely not responsible for the penetrating stab wounds on Meredith's neck. Nor, of course, did it match the blade impression left on Meredith's sheet. However, since it was non-serrated, it was "not incompatible" with the slashing wound.

And so we get to the illogical prosecution conclusion that two knives (at least) were held to Meredith's throat during the attack - it's the only way in which they can shoehorn the kitchen knife into the attack whilst acknowledging that another knife made the penetrating wounds and left the bloody impression on the sheet.

And there's one other thing: how and why did the kitchen knife from Sollecito's apartment get to the girls' cottage? None of the competing theories here makes much sense to me. Either Knox had taken to carrying an unsheathed large kitchen knife around in her handbag for personal protection; or the knife was taken over to the girls' house earlier that day for cooking; or it was taken over as part of a premeditated plan to "haze" or scare Meredith for some reason. But even if Knox felt she required protection, this would have been a completely unsuitable knife to choose; and the girls' cottage had a multitude of decent knives for cooking or "hazing" with.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Or perhaps a better analogy, the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA).


The Committee investigated until 1978, and in 1979 issued its final report, concluding that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, probably as a result of a conspiracy.

The more you look at the facts, the more disturbing the pattern becomes.

Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963. Then, on November 24, Jack Ruby assassinated Oswald. And then... 8 years later TO THE DAY, DB Cooper parachuted over eastern Washington and was never heard from again.

Coincidence? You tell me.

 

[Katody Matrass]

The issue of the knife/knives is, to me, a microcosm of the whole investigation.

Excellent post, LondonJohn

Luckily for AK and RS the genius that got the idea of (or was tasked with) selecting a knife by "professional intuition" was so inept that he chose the worst possible - not fitting the wounds, not fitting the print. It forced both Mignini and Massei to make up really moronic scenarios. And when it "tested" positively for DNA and got all over the news they had to fit it into their stories no matter what.

 

[Malkmus]

The issue of the knife/knives is, to me, a microcosm of the whole investigation. If a murder victim is slashed and stabbed in one specific area of their body (here, the neck), then it's highly unlikely for the wounds to have been made by two separate knives. After all, for two assailants, each of whom is wielding a sharp knife, it's not only physically difficult for both assailants to place a knife at the victim's throat simultaneously - it's also potentially dangerous to the assailants, since they risk stabbing each other in any sort of struggle.

Wow. Thanks for this post, John. I actually never knew that the stab wounds were only in that one area. I think I had taken earlier comments in the past that they were all over her as gospel truth. Very enlightening. Amazing how the truth keeps unravelling bit by bit...

 

[Chris C]

The more you look at the facts, the more disturbing the pattern becomes.

Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963. Then, on November 24, Jack Ruby assassinated Oswald. And then... 8 years later TO THE DAY, DB Cooper parachuted over eastern Washington and was never heard from again.

Coincidence? You tell me.

I'm DB Cooper

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Maresca and Mignini

Hello Everyone,

I found this quote in a Vanity Fair article from May 12, 2008:
“In December, when the decision to keep Amanda in jail until trial came down, Mignini was so thrilled he actually embraced the lawyer for Meredith’s family. ‘It was a home run,’ Maresca tells me, contented. ‘It meant all the evidence was good.’”

During the trial Maresca asked one of Amanda’s friends about her sex life in Seattle. I am troubled about the literal and figurative closeness between Mignini and Maresca, and I wonder whether Maresca might have been asking questions on behalf of Mignini. After all, why would the Kercher’s lawyer even care about what Amanda did before she met Meredith.

 

[christianahannah]

Hello Everyone,

I found this quote in a Vanity Fair article from May 12, 2008:
“In December, when the decision to keep Amanda in jail until trial came down, Mignini was so thrilled he actually embraced the lawyer for Meredith’s family. ‘It was a home run,’ Maresca tells me, contented. ‘It meant all the evidence was good.’”

During the trial Maresca asked one of Amanda’s friends about her sex life in Seattle. I am troubled about the literal and figurative closeness between Mignini and Maresca, and I wonder whether Maresca might have been asking questions on behalf of Mignini. After all, why would the Kercher’s lawyer even care about what Amanda did before she met Meredith.

Hello also Chris,

Do you have a link or know in what context that question (and subsequent questions asked) was asked to Amanda's friend?

 

[Mary_H]

the more you look at the facts, the more disturbing the pattern becomes.

Kennedy was assassinated on november 22, 1963. Then, on november 24, jack ruby assassinated oswald. And then... 8 years later to the day, db cooper parachuted over eastern washington and was never heard from again.

coincidence? You tell me.

lol!

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the witness declined to answer

Hello also Chris,

Do you have a link or know in what context that question (and subsequent questions asked) was asked to Amanda's friend?

The witness was asked something like, "Can you tell us about Amanda's sex life in Seattle?" He said, "No." This incident comes from the book, "Murder in Italy," but I do not have the page number handy.

 

[christianahannah]

The witness was asked something like, "Can you tell us about Amanda's sex life in Seattle?" He said, "No." This incident comes from the book, "Murder in Italy," but I do not have the page number handy.

Thank you Chris.

Do you suppose that question was asked because due to the sexual assault on Meredith? I can't recall if Amanda was asked anything similar during her questioning in June 2009.

I still have not read any of the books associated with Meredith's murder. Perhaps in the near future that will be accomplished.

 

[loverofzion]

As if she could do a worse job than the current one.

Who agrees that unreality is reality?

Just what are you talking about?

 

[loverofzion]

Thank you, Supernaut; I was the one who brought that up -- twice. To no avail.

I tried to post there yesterday but the guy deleted my comment three times.




Absolutely.




I agree.




Yes, and she complained about it, too, at least twice. Obscene post still there.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go commit sexual assault. Er, I mean... I have to take a shower.

May H again commenting on psychoanalysis?
Who ever put you in charge of that one?
What exactly make you qulaified to express anopinion on this subject?

For your infomratin psychoanalytic theories are still very much considered, especially in convoluted murder cases like this one.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

admissible

Thank you Chris.

Do you suppose that question was asked because due to the sexual assault on Meredith? I can't recall if Amanda was asked anything similar during her questioning in June 2009.

Christianahannah,

The rules for what is admissible in rape and sexual assault cases are complex and vary from one jurisdiction to another. Sometimes there is a balancing test. In this instance I have a very hard time seeing the relevance of this particular question.

 

[loverofzion]

BTW Mary, as someone observed on that blog - no regard seems to be made in this (b*llsh*t) "statement analysis" to the circumtances under which AK wrote it, which was immediately after relentless questioning over at least 40 hours in 3 days, during which she was asked over and over to describe her exact movements on the 1st and 2nd of Nov, which incuded, of course, the shower on the morning of the 2nd.

I happen to agree with those who think there was more to some of the cops questions about Amanda's and Merediths's sexuality than professional interest, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the email is in part a reflection of their obsessions.

"Relentless questioning" blah blah blah...it was actually for less than 3 hours that first night.
And yes she was given food and drink and allowed breaks.
By all accounts she was very well treated.

So enough about poor Amanda being coerced.
She wasn't.

 

[christianahannah]

Christianahannah,

The rules for what is admissible in rape and sexual assault cases are complex and vary from one jurisdiction to another. Sometimes there is a balancing test. In this instance I have a very hard time seeing the relevance of this particular question.

Chris,

I acknowledge it is so and agree with what you have written, however, it is useful to have the context in how that question was asked. If it was thrown in after a different line of questioning, to be used for drama, it has no relevance.

I am assuming this friend was called as a character witness on Amanda's behalf by the defense? Does the book you quote state whether Mignini asked a similar question of this friend Amanda? And how did the court react and Amanda's defense attorneys to the question being asked?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Massei's reasoning about the knife

One idea that tends to get repeated a lot and that's worth correcting is the claim that the kitchen knife is "compatible" with one of the neck wounds. In fact, none of the three independent experts appointed by Judge Matteini would say the knife was "compatible"; they said it was "not incompatible", which is a step down even from the pretty slippery word "compatible". The only reason it was "not incompatible" (as opposed to 'incompatible') is that it's a knife with a non-serrated blade, like millions of other knives. One of the experts said that many other knives are "more compatible" than this one.

So to say (for example) that one wound was so compatible with the kitchen knife as to "[match] the exact blade characteristics, as outlined in the autopsy report" is plain false. "Not incompatible" is as good as it gets: not exactly a ringing endorsement of the prosecution's theory. It'll be interesting to see if the Court decides to appoint more independent experts to evaluate the forensic evidence.

Katy_did,

Even the word compatible doesn’t really mean much unless one clarifies what is not compatible. An anonymous commenter at PMF misunderstood my earlier remarks. I am not taking Frank Sfarzo’s opinion over Massei’s; Frank is the reporter, not the expert. I am pointing out that Massei chose to believe Professor Cingolani over the other experts. One problem is that Massei apparently believes that the knife was not plunged to its full depth, which the experts I quoted found implausible. The other is that Massei again fails to explain adequately his reasoning, just as he failed with respect to the disagreement about the DNA on the bra clasp.

 

[Kestrel]

May H again commenting on psychoanalysis?
Who ever put you in charge of that one?
What exactly make you qulaified to express anopinion on this subject?

For your infomratin psychoanalytic theories are still very much considered, especially in convoluted murder cases like this one.

The theory that Rudy Guede sexually assaulted and murdered Meredith Kercher does not require using fringe psychoanalytic methods to explain the behavior of the accused.

 

[Supernaut]

May H again commenting on psychoanalysis?
Who ever put you in charge of that one?
What exactly make you qulaified to express anopinion on this subject?

For your infomratin psychoanalytic theories are still very much considered, especially in convoluted murder cases like this one.

"Psychoanalytic theories are still very much considered"? For your information, no, they are not. No college or university anywhere teaches "psychoanalysis".

"Psychoanalysis", Freudian and its offshoots, is now universally regarded as pseudoscience, employed by charlatans who pose as psychiatrists and "therapists" to the gullible.

Psychology and 'psychological profiling' certainly is used by law-enforcement agencies (amongst others), because it is a science and is actually useful.