Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Malkmus]

I see. I keep hearing conflicting accounts of how long she was really interrogated for. Also, about the whole food thing, I heard they did give her food and drink, although I know she claims it was only after she told them what they wanted to hear.

She also wasn't allowed to use the bathroom until she told them what they wanted to hear.

I just wanted to say that I'm really very sorry to hear these things because frankly what they said is not true. They treated me as a person only after I released the statements. Only after that, I could go to the toilet. Thank you.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/03/breakdown.html

 

[Solange305]

Errrr thanks for the advice. I'll take it on board. Although the word "irony" springs to mind.....

Edit: By the way - and I promise I'm being sincere here - accusing other posters of sounding condescending and rude is probably not going to go down well with those who run the JREF forums, as recent history has demonstrated. I would say that if you don't like my posting style, the best thing to do would be to send me a PM rather than posting it on the thread.

I'll take that advice next time, thanks.

She also wasn't allowed to use the bathroom until she told them what they wanted to hear.



http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/03/breakdown.html

According to her. Again, it's impossible to know who to believe. Although, taking into consideration what Patrick said, it may be true. It still doesn't necessarily make her innocent though. Also, think about the fact that when they arrested Patrick, they have a witness saying he killed Meredith, so I can see them being extremely angry and also very sure they had the right man.

Whereas with Amanda, what reason would they have to be so angry at her? Its easier to imagine them going too far with a man that is almost certainly (in their eyes at the time) a murderer and rapist, as opposed to a young girl.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

That is true. But then Im trying to imagine that same guy pulling himself in through the window, which was also covered in broken glass, or broken, right? I might be wrong about that, that is my understanding. It seems kind of unlikely. Why would Rudy break into a house where people he knows, who might be home could identify him? Why break into a house where you have 4 seperate girls who lead their own lives live, meaning any one of them might be home at the time (as opposed to say a family living in a home, who would go on vacation all together or to dinner all together and leaving the home unoccupied). You guys have to realize there are assertions on both side that don;t make sense.

I think the key to the break-in is the concrete planter adjacent to the window. Someone standing on it could reach the overhanging roof and swing across to the window ledge, and not have to crawl over broken glass.

As for the "why" of Rudy's actions, if you're going to ask that, you might also ask why Amanda and Raffaele would get involved in a murder for which they had no motive, and which could only cause them problems even if they never became suspects. And once they were under suspicion, why didn't they implicate Rudy, who left bloody shoe prints, a bloody hand print, and DNA inside the victim's body?

 

[Malkmus]

According to her. Again, it's impossible to know who to believe.

There's more on it in the article I linked, including this:

Ficarra recalled she couldn't pee in the morning for the urine test. It means she had probably just done that.

 

[Malkmus]

what reason would they have to be so angry at her? Its easier to imagine them going too far with a man that is almost certainly (in their eyes at the time) a murderer and rapist, as opposed to a young girl.

The reason would be that they had a text which they mistranslated as meaning that Amanda went out that night to meet Patrick. When she insisted she didn't go out that night they assumed she was lying and became impatient. And they weren't as mean to her as they were to Patrick.

 

[Solange305]

As for the "why" of Rudy's actions, if you're going to ask that, you might also ask why Amanda and Raffaele would get involved in a murder for which they had no motive, and which could only cause them problems even if they never became suspects. And once they were under suspicion, why didn't they implicate Rudy, who left bloody shoe prints, a bloody hand print, and DNA inside the victim's body?

I already did ask that, I mentioned that in one of posts. I don't cherry pick which person's actions to consider, like I said, I want to know the closest to the truth as possible, as much as can be determined from overseas and what we learn from the documents and media.

If I were them I wouldn't implicate Rudy either, the first thing he would do is turn right around and name them as accomplices or as the murderers, just like he eventually did. I am not saying that is exactly true, but it's a possibility.

 

[Chris C]

I'll take that advice next time, thanks.



According to her. Again, it's impossible to know who to believe. Although, taking into consideration what Patrick said, it may be true. It still doesn't necessarily make her innocent though. Also, think about the fact that when they arrested Patrick, they have a witness saying he killed Meredith, so I can see them being extremely angry and also very sure they had the right man.

Whereas with Amanda, what reason would they have to be so angry at her? Its easier to imagine them going too far with a man that is almost certainly (in their eyes at the time) a murderer and rapist, as opposed to a young girl.

They didn't file slander charges for her saying it. To the best of my knowledge the only thing they have filed charges against is the slap to the back of the head. Therefore if she wasn't a suspect what right do they have to detain her. If they are refusing food, water, attorney and bathroom break, plus they are saying she isn't a suspect till her statement. Then she is already being illegally detained.

 

[Chris C]

Do you have a list of who was taped in interviews? Were these witness interviews? And do you know if Rudy was taped?

I dont know if Guede was taped since his statements came after the signed statement which Knox retracted after she finally was able to use the bathroom, eat, drink and sleep. Filomena and Laura had taped conversations with the investigators. Knox had interviews after those taped conversations, yet even though she was interviewed for over 50 hours, none of those conversations where ever taped according Mignini. So you have 50+ hours of a girl speaking in American English and its not taped.

I guess its possible that after 50 hours of interrogation and a confessioin that someone probably said,

"Do you think we should have taped any of this?"

or

"Hey Joe, roll that tape back and lets hear it again." Joe responds, "What tape?"

 

[Katody Matrass]

I like that photo enlarged, it is very detailed. Thank you.

I am trying to imagine how the inner windows shut and latched and if they were shut and latched how easy or difficult it would be for someone to reach in through the broken glass, while balancing themselves on the window ledge, and unlatch them?

You may want to review the new article series at Bruce's site dealing exactly with such details.

The author proposes that the intruder purposefully cleared the window frame from glass shards, while standing on the grating below. That way he gained a stable hand hold to pull up on the ledge, open the window and proceed inside.

About the latching mechanism: It's a simple rotating rod with hooks on both ends. It requires no force and only one hand to open. Burglar could either open it while standing on the grating or if out of reach he could open it while kneeling or crouching on the ledge. Balancing would not be a problem - he could grab a cleared from glass part of the window frame with other hand.

 

[Solange305]

I very much wish they had taped them. I agree that doesnt help. I cant argue that.

I also hope they test that semen at the appeals. If there is one thing I think we can all agree on, is that we hope they test it!

Is there a picture of that lawyer on the window, showing the entire view from the ground? And Im assuming that metal grate was there when the murder took place?

 

[Katody Matrass]

Do you have a list of who was taped in interviews? Were these witness interviews? And do you know if Rudy was taped?

I remember reading a quote from Mignini where he admitted most of the interviews were taped and explained why they forgot to record the confessions.
Can't seem to find it now.

 

[Malkmus]

I remember reading a quote from Mignini where he admitted most of the interviews were taped and explained why they forgot to record the confessions.
Can't seem to find it now.

Here is the article:

http://translate.google.com/transla...9/12/12/AMRnVHCD-preston_parla_risponde.shtml

And the original post of mine:

Not hard proof of anything, but I found this quote from a Mignini interview on TJMK rather enlightening:

Quote:
Surely Preston was shocked by the interrogation. He says you were quite hard on him

Shocked? What can I say? This is how interrogations are conducted, their purpose is also to accuse.
So, here we have Mignini basically summing up interrogations as being "shocking" to the suspect and their purpose is to accuse. Says a lot about how Amanda's interrogation likely went. I wonder if "shocking" sometimes includes cuffing someone across the back of the head to get them to "remember better".

And these gems:

Quote:
You didn’t record it?

No. I usually do when for example I am in my office. I recorded the declarations of her roommates and of the witnesses. But that night, we were at the police station, there was agitation, and we had to go and arrest Lumumba, who had just been accused by Amanda. Lumumba was later cleared thanks to me
This makes very little sense to me and says nothing of the room not being set up for recording.

Quote:
What about the investigation on your abuse of office and wiretapping in Florence?

I still have to understand what I am being accused of.

However, the investigation has now ended. During this time the Tribunal of Riesame in Florence followed by the Cassazione have annulled all the proceedings initiated by Prosecutor Luca Turco against Dr Giuttari [who investigated the Monster case], my codefendant, as no evidence of the crime of abuse of office exists.
Sounds like a lie to me, or maybe there was a "conspiracy" against him since he was eventually found guilty.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Thanks Malkmus, that's it!

 

[Chris C]

I remember reading a quote from Mignini where he admitted most of the interviews were taped and explained why they forgot to record the confessions.
Can't seem to find it now.

Yeah, I could be wrong. It might just be the interrogations of Sollecito, Knox and Patrick that where not taped. They might or might not have taped the earlier statements in the previous days. Though it still doesn't explain why they didn't tape them. I guess the interrogation rooms dont have recording devices. Though they had hours to get someone to get one. After all they brought in 12 interrogators to interrogate them. Apparently they didn't have time to get a recording device.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Is there a picture of that lawyer on the window, showing the entire view from the ground? And Im assuming that metal grate was there when the murder took place?

Yes, the grating was there.
In the article I linked before you'll find a top down photo of the surroundings, ground included. And a discussion of possible approaches to the window.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

You may want to review the new article series at Bruce's site dealing exactly with such details.

The author proposes that the intruder purposefully cleared the window frame from glass shards, while standing on the grating below. That way he gained a stable hand hold to pull up on the ledge, open the window and proceed inside.

About the latching mechanism: It's a simple rotating rod with hooks on both ends. It requires no force and only one hand to open. Burglar could either open it while standing on the grating or if out of reach he could open it while kneeling or crouching on the ledge. Balancing would not be a problem - he could grab a cleared from glass part of the window frame with other hand.

That is indeed a very good series of articles and well worth the read.

I think it demonstrates very clearly that, despite police and guilter protestations, it's perfectly possible for an intruder to have entered the murder house by breaking Filomena's window and climbing in.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I already did ask that, I mentioned that in one of posts. I don't cherry pick which person's actions to consider, like I said, I want to know the closest to the truth as possible, as much as can be determined from overseas and what we learn from the documents and media.

If I were them I wouldn't implicate Rudy either, the first thing he would do is turn right around and name them as accomplices or as the murderers, just like he eventually did. I am not saying that is exactly true, but it's a possibility.

When a pack of rampaging adolescents kill someone, which does happen occasionally, they usually admit being present but accuse their accomplices of actually doing the crime. The police know this, so they start by questioning the person they think is least guilty, and has the most to gain by pointing the finger. In this case, they probably realized Amanda didn't physically commit the murder, but they thought she knew something. So, they threw her and Raffaele in the can and held a big press conference at which they floated the "sex game" story.

They thought this would cause Amanda and/or Raffaele to cut their losses and come clean. But it didn't, because Amanda and Raffaele had no information with which to bargain. When it turned out Lumumba had an airtight alibi, and the physical evidence pointed to a completely different guy, the police in Perugia realized they had set themselves up to look like buffoons. They have been locked in mortal combat with the truth ever since then. But, as Hercule Poirot famously said, "la verite est en marche et rien ne l'arretera," which translates roughly as "Mignini is mean and fat, and he's gonna lose in the end."

 

[Mary_H]

That is true. But then Im trying to imagine that same guy pulling himself in through the window, which was also covered in broken glass, or broken, right? I might be wrong about that, that is my understanding. It seems kind of unlikely. Why would Rudy break into a house where people he knows, who might be home could identify him? Why break into a house where you have 4 seperate girls who lead their own lives live, meaning any one of them might be home at the time (as opposed to say a family living in a home, who would go on vacation all together or to dinner all together and leaving the home unoccupied). You guys have to realize there are assertions on both side that don;t make sense.

Just a reminder -- this was a long holiday weekend in Perugia. Rudy was friends with the boys downstairs, so may very well have known they were all going out of town for the weekend. If he noticed the house was completely dark, he may have concluded the girls had done the same thing.

Someone posted recently -- I'm sorry, I can't remember where or who it was -- an excellent, if speculative, explanation of why Rudy was in a spot where he needed money fast, and that this might just have been an opportunity that presented itself. That is, if he did climb in the window, with the goal of burglarizing the house.

 

[Mary_H]

....the police in Perugia realized they had set themselves up to look like buffoons. They have been locked in mortal combat with the truth ever since then. But, as Hercule Poirot famously said, "la verite est en marche et rien ne l'arretera," which translates roughly as "Mignini is mean and fat, and he's gonna lose in the end."

!!! How true.

 

[Solange305]

Just a reminder -- this was a long holiday weekend in Perugia. Rudy was friends with the boys downstairs, so may very well have known they were all going out of town for the weekend. If he noticed the house was completely dark, he may have concluded the girls had done the same thing.

Someone posted recently -- I'm sorry, I can't remember where or who it was -- an excellent, if speculative, explanation of why Rudy was in a spot where he needed money fast, and that this might just have been an opportunity that presented itself. That is, if he did climb in the window, with the goal of burglarizing the house.

Thanks, that was one of my questions, whether or not he knew the boys would be out of town, I figured he probably did.