• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
what the devil

Since Kestrel's post has been quoted, I ask again, is there any actual, decent evidence that Mignini ever described the murder as having been committed by a cult, Satanic or otherwise?

shuttlt,

You have yet to comment on Ms. Nadeau's report on Mignini's closing remarks that two commenters (myself and RWVBWL) have mentioned.
 
Kaosium,

Thank's for your work.

This passage is interesting. I haven't had a chance to enlarge and try to translate Rose's posted documents of the Matteini Report, but the highlighted section (above) suggests to me that Raffaele is blaming Amanda, and the ultimate blame is due to Amanda's difficulty to "speak and understand Italian."
Nice catch, Fine! I think you're right, additionally this fragment should probably be rendered:

"even for her difficulty to speak and understand Italian"

Thus Raffaele isn't pretending his own Italian caused problems, but Amanda's. That makes more sense, I understand Raffaele comes from an area known for their accent, but I think it makes more sense in context to assume that should have been 'her' not 'him.'

If this is the proper explanation for Raffaele telling the cops that Amanda left him that night---"a different version than the dates previously"--- then he must have been bewildered, indeed, to find that Amanda had begun her own interrogation ---a couple hours later---the night of November 5th saying she'd stayed with him all night. When the cops confronted him with that information he must have realized ---WTF!!!---that he'd misunderstood what Amanda wanted him to say. But, apparently, the cops didn't believe him.

Ohhh, I don't think that was the way of it. :)

If Raffaele is saying at 10:40 that Amanda had left that night, I'm pretty sure little miss cartwheels was cooling her heels in a nice backroom with Perugia's finest by 10:45. They brought Raffaele in for a reason, and it looks like the first thing they did was tell him they had 'proof' Amanda was elsewhere. They sure couldn't have wasted much time if they already have his statement at 10:40.

When did they get there, 10:15-10:30? This bespeaks a plan, and it explains why all the extra cops are on duty at that hour and why Giobbi was 'mathematically certain' Amanda was to come in, even if she never knew it. The 'smoked' Raffaele probably never told her, knowing she would tag along anyway.

Thus the completely clueless Amanda is in there trying to tell them she never left that night, and the cops with their 'hard evidence' that they think has now been confirmed by Raffaele are completely convinced she left that night, that she met Patrick Lumumba, and that she's lying about it to protect him. At this point they probably don't have her involved with--as in actively committing--the murder, being as that's actually pretty bloody unlikely. It took the mind of Mignini, who isn't there yet, to come up with that idiocy.

The longer she continues to tell the truth, the more they become convinced she's lying. The crescendo builds and builds; Amanda, exhausted, uncomprehending and frightened becomes so completely stressed she becomes vulnerable to the police's insistence her memories are wrong, she must have repressed them. Having no idea what to believe anymore, her mind searches for answers, and the one they've been subtly suggesting all along comes to mind: Patrick Lumumba. Maybe dopemine production exploding in her thalamus, perhaps the stress blocks her seretonin and/or norepinephrine, she gets cuffed about and it comes to her, and what she's imagining seems like an epiphany the police must be right, and she breaks and complies.

It doesn't last, of course, it starts to fade--but by that time it's too late. The police think they've captured their murderers, all the pieces seem to fit into place.


(By the way, I believe that no one ever thought that Patrick and Amanda smoked hash when they met the afternoon of November 5th. They'd met outside the library of the University for Foreigners. A very public place, and neither Patrick nor Amanda said they smoked hash there.)
///

I imagine this was just a suggestion agreed to by the broken Amanda, it was supposedly the night of the murder, and she did smoke hash that night, and they've convinced her she must have been with Patrick, so it would follow that he'd end up passing the hash pipe with her.
 
That’s pretty much the same as when 'interrogation' is used to describe any and all but Amanda's last trip to the police station.

The one on the fourth could also be termed an 'interrogation.' It left her a whimpering, babbling mess judging from that e-mail.
 
I'm sorry, people believed that the murder was teh work of ACTUAL Satanists? People who worship Satan, drink animal blood, draw pentagrams and try to summon their Dark Lord? The whole Aleister Crowley thing. Evidence that this belief was held for more than 5 minutes by anyone, please?

Didn't you just argue that another case Mignini prosecuted really was about Satanists? In your rather strongly worded statement above, are you distinguishing this case from that, or are you belittling Mignini and the Italians who believed him, or what?
 
Have you been reading my posts? I'm baffled by your response. My argument is that you are implying he believed that the murder was the work of ACTUAL cultists - whether they be Satanists, Pagans, or whatever. This is such an over embelishment of him saying that there were ritualistic elements, which perhaps there were, that I don't know how to begin arguing with you. Many serial killers clearly include ritualistic elements to their crimes, to imply that these are necessarily religious in nature is nonsense.

Have you read this?

This isn't just Preston, and it isn't just people who hate him, it's a part of his personality. Frank doesn't hate him, neither does Barbie Nadeau. That's three completely separate sources. Some people make the world more interesting for themselves by thinking in terms of secret societies going back to the ancient Egyptians--which the Freemasons become if you want them to badly enough. It's popular in some circles, ever read an Ian Fleming novel?
;)
 
To make this as simple as I know how, how do you propose to get before the court the notion that Raf's damaging admissions were the result of duress or guile?
 
kaosium,

Some time ago I may have provided links to Amnesty International reports on Italy circa 2007-2008. I am not sure if this is the same link I previously gave or not, but the 2007 report said:

"There was no independent police complaints and accountability body. Policing operations were not in line with the European Code of Police Ethics, for example in the requirement for officers to display prominently some form of identification, such as a service number, to ensure they could be held accountable."

The 2008 report said, "Italy continued to lack an effective police accountability mechanism. There were irregularities in legal processes against law enforcement officials accused of human rights violations."

Ah, thank you, I do believe I recall reading that in this thread a while back come to think on it. I see that there is at least some framework in place, it's just divorced completely from how this 'calunnia' works. Basically what it amounts to is unless she wanted to undertake an entirely different action, she couldn't tell the truth of what happened in the Questora.

I think the EU should have a talk with the Italians about this whole practice. I understand Quadraginta's point that perhaps a protection against defamation is not unsound, but in the case of explaining two cuffs on the head getting her six years additional years in prison that she might have to 'serve' even if acquitted is not justice, it's a mockery of such.

Granted even if 'convicted' that would probably be reduced to time served, but she'd lose out on what they damn well owe her for what they've done to her when all she did was tell the truth. :(
 
You are saying that the local definition of "guilter" is anyone who hasn't made up their mind about the case, and this definition would thus exclude anyone who is convinced of guilt. This is ludicrous on its face. :eek:

The only sensible meaning that "guilter" can possibly have is "people who think that Knox & Sollecito are guilty".


"A guilter is someone that believes in the guilt of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito regardless of any evidence that is presented proving otherwise."

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/guilters.html


I've thought of a 'guilter' as someone who stubbornly refuses to look at the evidence of innocence. Any expert or noted professional who states their opinion is they are innocent are automatically hacks. Evidence of police incompetence and corruption are dismissed out of hand. Any thing that strikes too hard at their belief is simply ignored completely. I don't think of someone who leans toward guilt but is really searching the truth as a guilter.
 
Last edited:
Ah, thank you, I do believe I recall reading that in this thread a while back come to think on it. I see that there is at least some framework in place, it's just divorced completely from how this 'calunnia' works. Basically what it amounts to is unless she wanted to undertake an entirely different action, she couldn't tell the truth of what happened in the Questora.

I think the EU should have a talk with the Italians about this whole practice. I understand Quadraginta's point that perhaps a protection against defamation is not unsound, but in the case of explaining two cuffs on the head getting her six years additional years in prison that she might have to 'serve' even if acquitted is not justice, it's a mockery of such.

Granted even if 'convicted' that would probably be reduced to time served, but she'd lose out on what they damn well owe her for what they've done to her when all she did was tell the truth. :(

So, if anyone testifies on Amanda's behalf that they too were treated badly by the police, they could be subjected to a charge of 'calunnia' themselves.
How do they expect AK's lawywers to defend the calunnia charge?
 
Have you read this?

This isn't just Preston, and it isn't just people who hate him, it's a part of his personality. Frank doesn't hate him, neither does Barbie Nadeau. That's three completely separate sources. Some people make the world more interesting for themselves by thinking in terms of secret societies going back to the ancient Egyptians--which the Freemasons become if you want them to badly enough. It's popular in some circles, ever read an Ian Fleming novel?
;)

Great article!
 
So, if anyone testifies on Amanda's behalf that they too were treated badly by the police, they could be subjected to a charge of 'calunnia' themselves.
How do they expect AK's lawywers to defend the calunnia charge?

There is not much her lawyers can do. The police "forgot" to tape her interrogation and it is their word against hers. Her hope is for an honest cop to come forward and back up her statement. Those are very low odds.
 
What could it add to the case to confirm Amanda's claim (boilerplate allegations, really) that her "confession" was coerced? Even the court doesn't credit it.
 
My point: It seems like the cop is very unfriendly. State super cops are usually known for being polite and courteous.

My point: It looks a lot like that Vietnam photo of an execution.

http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/20101227/5e331f_cops_12272010.jpg


Actually, Justinian, I think we are looking at a photo of two cops. The one in the reflective jacket is about to open the door to the building, and the other one is aiming at the door. Both have guns. Telephoto lenses always foreshorten distances -- the men actually may be standing ten feet apart.
 
What could it add to the case to confirm Amanda's claim (boilerplate allegations, really) that her "confession" was coerced? Even the court doesn't credit it.

True perhaps, but it would mean that she would be cleared of the calunnia charge still pending against her. So it would be very meaningful for her.

Also, her parents have been charged with "defamation." Confirming Amanda's claim would exonerate them, I presume.
 
Originally Posted by LondonJohn
Now, while we're talking about pejorative, offensive vocabulary, the terms "FOAker" and "groupie", on the other hand............
I'm sure quadraginta will complain just as much about those next time they are used, too. :rolleyes:


The next time someone uses them to describe me you may count on it.

I would have thought that you might have noticed my expression of dislike for such labels when used as pejoratives was not limited to any particular faction's choices.
 
Last edited:
It's conversation like this that make me question the point of participating in this debate and the good faith or sanity of the people I'm debating with.


I admit I was having some fun with you, shuttlt, because your post seemed to validate Chris's claim quite inadvertently. Maybe I shouldn't have been so subtle.

I don't see why anybody would introduce the word "Satanic" in this case except to ridicule Mignini, and/or to confuse the uninitiated into thinking that he actually believed the killings were the work of characters from a Dan Brown novel..... Saying that there were ritualistic elements, assuming that's what he did say, clearly does not necessarily imply religious, let alone specifically Satanist religious rituals.


Bloggers aren't the ones who introduced the word "Satanic." It was reported in all the news media from the very beginning. Given that so much of the information about the case was provided by the police and the prosecution, who is to say the press didn't receive that word straight from the horse's mouth?

If I went about bunging words into Amanda's mouth in the manner that is going on here with Mignini people would freak. Should I describe Amanda as a "known whore", or even "self-confessed whore" because she slept with Raffaele outside marriage? Is Raffaele a Catholic, does he agree, do you suppose, with Mignini that the murder was satanic?


I doubt Raffaele ever thought of the murder as ritualistic. We have it on record (the Micheli report) that Mignini did.

Speaking of gratuitously introducing terminology, how is repeating that Mignini suspected a Satanic ritual was behind the murders analogous to calling Amanda a whore?
 
kaosium,

Some time ago I may have provided links to Amnesty International reports on Italy circa 2007-2008. I am not sure if this is the same link I previously gave or not, but the 2007 report said:

"There was no independent police complaints and accountability body. Policing operations were not in line with the European Code of Police Ethics, for example in the requirement for officers to display prominently some form of identification, such as a service number, to ensure they could be held accountable."

The 2008 report said, "Italy continued to lack an effective police accountability mechanism. There were irregularities in legal processes against law enforcement officials accused of human rights violations."<snip>


Patrick did get his settlement for false arrest rather quickly, though. In Italy, suing in the courts seems to be the way to do things, as opposed to going through any regulatory bodies
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom