Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kaosium]

Kaosium,

You've made a Kipling fan of me.

I can relate to giants of his era more than to the people of this era. Perhaps the giants of this era will be found someday.

Here's one for Raffaele and Amanda, it's a sad one as befits their tragic fate, but it is hopeful, more so than what Kipling had left when he wrote it, as everything he believed in was fading away like he foresaw a generation previous when he feared he saw 'the Captains and the Kings depart.'

Perhaps Mignini, fearful of his own hidden impulses, has projected them onto Amanda and Raffaele.

Perhaps Mignini, fearful of his own hidden impulses, has tried to protect the world from his own dark side as reflected by his aberrated persecution of Amanda and Raffaele.

Perhaps the persecution of Amanda and Raffaele is due to the fact that Mignini and others aren't masters of their dreams as in the Kipling poem.

I wonder sometimes if he still believes it. Frank Sfarzo thinks he's mostly a victim of his faith in the police in Perugia, that he basically just did his job. But from what I can tell, his mind is all over that theory, and he prosecuted it knowing how empty the case was.

From Frank's piece on him, which is the most complete picture I've found of him, you get the impression he sees himself as Gandalf, riding the countryside battling evil. He has the wrong Istari though, it looks like in the end he's the one who 'studied too long the ways of the Enemy' instead.

According to that article I saw Halides post or comment on a month or so ago, Mignini believes two of the most important items in the conviction were the DNA 'evidence.' Were those to be thrown out, would he rethink it? Or will it be better if eventually someone gets to tell him it ends:

'When you hang from a gibbet at your window for the sport of your own crows.'

 

[Kaosium]

It was dirty and the picture of it looking like that dates from when it was seized by police. No way it could possibly have been the murder weapon.

The latter I'm certain of, so much so that when I started reading about it I simply would not believe it was possible they'd ever take it into a court, or that one would accept it. I thought people saying so were 'exaggerating' to use a polite euphemism.

However, wouldn't the prosecution have thrown a fit if it was that filthy? Belted it out to the cheap seats? Or is one of those charming instances where there's so much wrong with the evidence some got forgotten as then the ones arguing guilt would ask people to make up their minds, as if nine reasons it couldn't be evidence were somehow 'proof' it was legitimate? You remember those arguments?

 

[Kaosium]

Could it be that in the first weeks after the arrests (and particularly while they still thought they had Lumumba) M & M (Mignini & Maresca) thought that AK and RS could be forced into accepting a closed "fast track" trial, pleading guilty to whatever the equivalent of 'accessory to murder' is, with the assurance of a lenient sentence, even less than Guede eventually received?

But with this, the acceptence by them (to be made explicit to the court) that as large a damages payment as they could raise would subsequently be negotiated with the shyster.

M & M might of imagined that they could intimidate the two, percieving them as weak young people - 'nobodies' - into believing that there was no hope of aqcuittal in open court, but that they might be free in a few years (parole after 4 or 5?) if they "cooperated".

If this had been the scheme in the first days or weeks, it rapidly went "the way of the pear" after it became clear that Raff and Amanda were never going to do anything but maintain their complete innocence, and that Amanda's family would sacrifice everything in fighting for her.

(What's needed here is some history, accounts of other Italian trials in recent decades, particularly in Perugia, where there was doubt about the criminal charges, and where civil damages actions have also been brought.)

I think this would be a reasonable explanation for the odd reasons for appealing their sentences. The 'stern look', pot charge and Amanda's noise ticket aren't very compelling reasons to contest a sentence. Some think it was the 'PR campaign,' but being as Mignini filed charges on both families anyway, it's not like it was necessary. If they'd have admitted to perhaps peripheral involvement, say being there and 'witnessing' Rudy doing the killing and then cleaning up or something they might have been out of jail by now.

What I'd like to know is just what convinced them when Rudy was caught and Patrick released to not re-examine the evidence, notice the mistake with the shoes prints, realize that knife never left the drawer, and just let them go. At that point there's no footprints in the hall or bra-clasp, what caused them to keep them locked up?

When did the Supreme Court throw out the 'confessions?'

 

[Justinian2]

This is a snip of the timeline from PMF. I hope I didn't copy too much. They seem to have done a good job with this.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2

2043 AK seen on CCTV entering her house (?) A figure in light coloured clothing is shown exiting a small white car and moving towards the cottage. This was not Meredith who was wearing dark clothing and had walked home. Quality of CCTV image very poor, so positive ID not possible

2046 Meredith arrives eight minutes after RG arrives (per RG)

2050 RS chops up button mushrooms with his knife, and he and AK stir fry them (per Mignini)

2100 AK claimed to meet PL at B-Ball courts and [return] to her house. (per the Judge)

2100 Meredith leaves friend’s house with Sophie Purton to return home, Sophie walks her halfway

2105 Sophie Purton leaves Meredith on Via Roscetto, Meredith continues home alone

2110 Click on RS's computer, no more activity on computer until following day

2115 Around this time MK arrives home

2141 - 0532 of the night of the crime "is not any human interaction at RS apt" (per RS' computer)

2200 - 2230 Meredith is either dead or dying. A breakdown truck arrives for a broken down car containing a family of three, man, woman and child. The Albanian 'superwitness', Hekuran Kokomani, arrives by car at the rubbish bins area a short way down the road from the cottage. HK punches RS, throws a phone and olives at AK, who threatens HK with knife. HK drives further down the road encountering RG who recognises HK and offers money to hire HK's car, first 50, then offering 250 euros. HK hears banging sounding like 'wood on wood' from the house. RG says there is a birthday party at the cottage. HK refuses hire his car, driving off having seen RS in his wing mirror running at him with knife. RS persues him to the lights, where a motorist asks HK for directions. HK has to reverse his car to allow the breakdown truck, which is probably just arriving, to manoeuvre. HK leaves (per HK)

2200 - 2230 “Alessandra Formica, said her partner was almost knocked over by a black man running away from scene”. The couple also witness the broken down car and breakdown truck. This now matches testimony by Kokomani, both in time and event. The breakdown truck was information that had been withheld from the public by police, so both had to have been there

2213 SMS requesting account balance sent from MK's mobile to her bank

I don't see where Amanda and Raffaele conspired with Guede here.

 

[Withnail1969]

The latter I'm certain of, so much so that when I started reading about it I simply would not believe it was possible they'd ever take it into a court, or that one would accept it. I thought people saying so were 'exaggerating' to use a polite euphemism.

However, wouldn't the prosecution have thrown a fit if it was that filthy? Belted it out to the cheap seats? Or is one of those charming instances where there's so much wrong with the evidence some got forgotten as then the ones arguing guilt would ask people to make up their minds, as if nine reasons it couldn't be evidence were somehow 'proof' it was legitimate? You remember those arguments?

They just focused on the DNA and everyone forgot that it was supposed to have been thoroughly cleaned. It's not filthy, but dirty enough to show that it hasn't been cleaned.

 

[Kaosium]

Not to blow any collective trumpets, but I have a feeling that many of the points that some of us have been arguing on here during 2010-2011 will turn out to be correct.

We have long argued that the state of Meredith's stomach/intestine contents is totally incompatible with a time of death of 11.45pm (the inexplicable finding of the first court), and in fact they are only compatible with a ToD before 10.00pm. I think that the appeal court will come to the same conclusion.

We've also long argued that the DNA evidence on both the knife and the bra clasp are so dodgy/weak as to be inadmissible. I think the appeal court will come to the same conclusion.

We've also long argued that Curatolo is a completely unreliable witness, whose testimony should never have been accepted. I pretty much KNOW that the appeal court will come to the same conclusion.

We've also long argued that Quintavalle and Capezzalli are also unreliable witnesses, based upon the quality, detail and timing of their testimony. If the appeal court gets as far as to evaluate these witnesses, I think it might come to the same conclusion.

We've also long argued that the first court was erroneous in concluding that the break-in had to have been staged (and that, by extension, Knox and Sollecito had staged it). We'll have to see how the appeal court deals with that one.

Yes, indeed, and I think it was you that long ago was arguing the disco buses were not running that night as well. I'm pretty sure I saw it back in the last thread long before the appeal team announced which we first saw on the Shock two months ago.

What I'm wondering is if they could have any 'surprises' in the appeal. Machiavelli said they weren't bound by the theories of the first trial, and Massei didn't exactly abide by the prosecutions theory, so what kind of case could they put together? They would seem to have little to work with, the defense will know what's coming this time and it's almost like walking into the shadow of death for the prosecution.

What they have going for them is the fact they got a conviction the first time. They can't really introduce new 'evidence' without risking total meltdown. A new 'witness' perhaps? Someone they round up willing to say they were in the mysterious car and say they saw Rudy, Raffaele and Amanda enter and leave? A 'better' witness statement from Rudy, as I still don't quite get why they couldn't get him to go all the way last time?

What could they try? No one wants to walk into an ambush on all fronts, there must be some prosecution plan.

 

[Kaosium]

This is a snip of the timeline from PMF. I hope I didn't copy too much. They seem to have done a good job with this.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2



I don't see where Amanda and Raffaele conspired with Guede here.

I think that's pretty old, it still has Amanda as the figure in the CCTV camera and I see the Albanian is referenced. I recall reading they decided to drop the timeline idea. That must be from before the trial as they still have a scientifically possible time of death, before Mignini was forced to push it back an hour to account for Curatolo's ramblings, and he's not even listed.

 

[Kaosium]

They just focused on the DNA and everyone forgot that it was supposed to have been thoroughly cleaned. It's not filthy, but dirty enough to show that it hasn't been cleaned.

"Extremely clean" if I recall correctly from [282] I posted about ten pages back. Which it should have been, coming out of a drawer, but then again perhaps 'stoner logic' prevailed and it was 'decided' that the cleaning part could be postponed until the next time they used it! Then they would know it was perfectly clean!

There's something wrong here, either the cop was mistaken or applying 'Perugian police logic' which apparently meant it looked clean because the theory needed it to at one point, and damn the reality, or somehow it got dirty between being taken from the drawer and being presented in court.

So the way I see it, for it to have never been cleaned that means both Raffale and/or Amanda didn't clean it before putting it away AND the policeman was wrong, or it somehow got dirty between when they plucked it from the drawer and when it was presented in court. Either way, they lose.

Hmmm...how could we put that into an easy sentence? 'The police can't decide if it was dirty and thus unwashed and therefore couldn't be the murder weapon, or if somehow they got it all dirty in the process of 'finding' a few picograms of Meredith's DNA?'

 

[Draca]

But then when did the shoe prints get on the pillowcase? If rudy grabbed the pillow off the bed and put it under Meredith then how did the bloody shoe prints get on the pillowcase if the pillow is already under Meredith?

Her hip was partially on the pillow. He could have stepped on one side of the pillow or between her legs. I don't know where the stain was found on the pillow case.

 

[Chris C]

If there's a civil action in progress they must already be frozen. Your scenario of Raffaele signing over his assets to someone else to avoid them being seized is somewhat naive in my opinion.

Not necessarily. Doesn't Sollecito have the right to use his assets for a lawyer?

 

[LondonJohn]

I think that's pretty old, it still has Amanda as the figure in the CCTV camera and I see the Albanian is referenced. I recall reading they decided to drop the timeline idea. That must be from before the trial as they still have a scientifically possible time of death, before Mignini was forced to push it back an hour to account for Curatolo's ramblings, and he's not even listed.

It's also inaccurate in several respects, the more significant of which are these:

1) Re the 2200-22.30 entry, Alessandra Formica saw a North African man bump into her boyfriend - a completely different ethnic group than the Sub-Saharan African group to which Guede belongs (anyone could tell the difference - think Colonel Gaddafi vs Idi Amin).

2) The 22.13 entry claiming that an SMS (text) was sent from Meredith's phone to her UK bank requesting an account balance is totally incorrect. In fact, it's almost certain that Meredith's phone received notification of an incoming MMS message (probably a photo) at this time, and connected to GPRS to start downloading it. The download was then likely terminated by whoever had the phone in their posession at that time (in my view, Guede).

3) The 02.00 entry claims that passers-by reported loud voices coming from within the girls' cottage. This never surfaced in the trial, and is almost certainly untrue.

4) The timeline of the discovery of the phones in Sig.a Lara's garden is significantly incorrect. The first phone was found at around 9am, but the second phone (Meredith's UK phone) was only found at a little after 12pm, when a call from Knox led to its ringtone leading to its discovery.

5) On 2nd November, the Postal Police arrived not at 12.35pm, but at 12.55-1.00pm. Batistelli lied when he testified that the arrival was at 12.35pm, and the police also knowingly gave false corroboration to his story via an incorrectly-timestamped CCTV camera (which the police knew by that time to be incorrect).

6) Knox's questioning on the 5th/6th November didn't begin at midnight - it almost certainly began at around 11pm.


In addition to the factual innacuracies, the timeline is frequently risibly slanted in much of its use of language towards a demonstration of Knox's/Sollecito's guilt, rather than being a simple objective timeline. It therefore disqualifies itself (in my view) on two separate counts: inaccuracy and bias.

 

[el buscador]

"Extremely clean" if I recall correctly from [282] I posted about ten pages back. Which it should have been, coming out of a drawer, but then again perhaps 'stoner logic' prevailed and it was 'decided' that the cleaning part could be postponed until the next time they used it! Then they would know it was perfectly clean!

There's something wrong here, either the cop was mistaken or applying 'Perugian police logic' which apparently meant it looked clean because the theory needed it to at one point, and damn the reality, or somehow it got dirty between being taken from the drawer and being presented in court.

So the way I see it, for it to have never been cleaned that means both Raffale and/or Amanda didn't clean it before putting it away AND the policeman was wrong, or it somehow got dirty between when they plucked it from the drawer and when it was presented in court. Either way, they lose.

Hmmm...how could we put that into an easy sentence? 'The police can't decide if it was dirty and thus unwashed and therefore couldn't be the murder weapon, or if somehow they got it all dirty in the process of 'finding' a few picograms of Meredith's DNA?'

"If the knife is dirty = it wasnt cleaned = there should be blood all over the knife and abundance of DNA."

Recently posted by Anonymous on Franks blog.

 

[Chris C]

"If the knife is dirty = it wasnt cleaned = there should be blood all over the knife and abundance of DNA."

Recently posted by Anonymous on Franks blog.

Yup and if the knife is dirty, not thoroughly cleaned, it should also test positive for blood, which it didn't. Nowhere on that knife tested positive for blood. Remember the claims that the luminol footprints were blood also. Thats two different items in this case that supposedly had blood all over them and yet both failed to test positive for blood.

 

[Draca]

Maresca and 25 million

Maresca expressed all his admiration for the elegance of the silence of Meredith's family.
So different from the endless appearances of Amanda's family and from the attempts of Raffaele's family.

Then, Maresca & Perna, asked for the conviction of Amanda & Raffaele, the payment of the trial fees, of the legal expenses, and of 25 million euro to Arlyne, John, Stephanie and brothers.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/11/insults-and-conviction-for-amanda-knox.html

It looks like legal fees (Maresca's pay) are also on the line to confirm the guilty verdict along with the civil suit money.

I wonder what payment arrangement was in place if they were found innocent? Or perhaps it was always to be a percentage of the judgement.

If the Kerchers priority was to get to the truth, hiring a lawyer with a financial incentive for guilt was a poor strategy to get it.

 

[Withnail1969]

Not necessarily. Doesn't Sollecito have the right to use his assets for a lawyer?

I'm sure you're right about that, but I'm also sure he can't sign away his property or the proceeds from its sale to his sister, for example, to avoid having to pay damages in a civil suit. That's what CoulsdonUK was claiming he would be able to do.

 

[Chris C]

I'm sure you're right about that, but I'm also sure he can't sign away his property or the proceeds from its sale to his sister, for example, to avoid having to pay damages in a civil suit. That's what CoulsdonUK was claiming he would be able to do.

He could sign that property over to his sister as a payment towards his legal fees. Or even sign it over to his dad as a payment towards his legal fees.

 

[Withnail1969]

He could sign that property over to his sister as a payment towards his legal fees. Or even sign it over to his dad as a payment towards his legal fees.

I wouldn't have thought so. If there's a civil suit in progress you can't just hide your assets by signing them away and then say you haven't got any money.

 

[Chris C]

I wouldn't have thought so. If there's a civil suit in progress you can't just hide your assets by signing them away and then say you haven't got any money.

He wouldn't be hiding them. He would be giving them up to pay for his legal fees. Or do you think 4 years of legal fees from his type of legal staff will be cheap?

 

[Withnail1969]

He wouldn't be hiding them. He would be giving them up to pay for his legal fees. Or do you think 4 years of legal fees from his type of legal staff will be cheap?

I suppose his legal fees could be pretty astronomical now that you mention it. Legal fees could probably account for a sizeable chunk of the 2 million.

 

[Chris C]

I suppose his legal fees could be pretty astronomical now that you mention it. Legal fees could probably account for a sizeable chunk of the 2 million.

Thats why i brought up a possible backlash because of Maresca. Thats also why im wondering how italian law deals with this. Mignini downright took advantage of the Kerchers loss and emotions in helping him get the conviction. Yet, I'm betting all the crap will roll downhill when its over and land right in the Kerchers lap.