The Massei/Mignini Conspiracy Theory

[LashL]

You should ask CT forum ingenue LashL...

Excuse me? Please be clear about what it is that you are suggesting or insinuating by this remark.

 

[Draca]

Mop Madness

I think it's natural to want to fit every single piece of data we have into a single compelling narrative, the way it works in detective stories.

However it's almost certainly a mistake in a case we have so much data about. If every possible related incident is canvassed and only the interesting-seeming ones are reported you are bound to hit some odd coincidences.

I think the reason we might want to try to fit cat blood, breakdowns and so on into the story is the same reason why the guilters get so obsessive about trying to cram mops and lamps into the narrative somehow as evidence of Amanda and Raffaele's guilt. It's quite hard to let go of an interesting anomaly and say it's just a coincidence, but if we can't do that then we will end up fixing on ridiculous conspiracy theories every time there is a weird coincidence.

Unless more data comes in I think the leak in Raffaele's flat, the mops, the lamp, the breakdown, the cat blood and so on and on are just irrelevant coincidences. They certainly aren't grounds to revise the likelihood of Raffaele and Amanda's innocence or guilt.

Aye Kevin,

I think you're right. The mop has driven me a bit mad at times. I had to back away and let it go. Rose and Dan O. seemed to be getting somewhere with it at one point though.

 

[RoseMontague]

Aye Kevin,

I think you're right. The mop has driven me a bit mad at times. I had to back away and let it go. Rose and Dan O. seemed to be getting somewhere with it at one point though.

The mop is not part of my idea of a Massei/Mignini conspiracy theory. The lamp could be a part of it and I am still working on that one. I have reviewed all the reports on the testimony of those that were there when the door was broken down as well as the descriptions of the first people to enter the room and the lamp is not mentioned in those reports. It is only in later reports that it is mentioned. It was assigned an evidence tag letter however. Still a mystery for me.

 

[Draca]

Lamp Madness

The mop is not part of my idea of a Massei/Mignini conspiracy theory. The lamp could be a part of it and I am still working on that one. I have reviewed all the reports on the testimony of those that were there when the door was broken down as well as the descriptions of the first people to enter the room and the lamp is not mentioned in those reports. It is only in later reports that it is mentioned. It was assigned an evidence tag letter however. Still a mystery for me.

I meant LAMP. I don't know why I wrote mop.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Controlled demolition

I meant LAMP. I don't know why I wrote mop.

Lamp of course. That would be another one point of the CT, were waiting for some good theories about it too

In other news, Amanda's "I was there" makes a big come back. I can't help but notice how similar is the reasoning of our conspiracy theorists to the 9/11 truthers here. Remember that famous Larry Silverstein quote about "pulling" the building?

 

[Dan O.]

I thought we had laid the mop to rest. Raffaele testified that they had taken the mop into the house and Amanda put it away. In the video we see ILE taking the mop out of the closet before gift wrapping it.

Then we had a long discussion about what looked like a mop in a bucket outside the cottage. There was a stick that could have been a mop handle but the bucket was a crate with holes.

Then this documentary comes out following the lifetime movie and in two fleeting shots there is very clearly a full mop leaning on a bucket that is sitting in that crate.

Is this part of some conspiracy to prove me wrong?

The documentary was on HULU so I couldn't download it to examine that segment more closely. Does anyone have an alternate source for the documentary? I'd like to clean up this mess.

 

[RoseMontague]

I thought we had laid the mop to rest. Raffaele testified that they had taken the mop into the house and Amanda put it away. In the video we see ILE taking the mop out of the closet before gift wrapping it.

Then we had a long discussion about what looked like a mop in a bucket outside the cottage. There was a stick that could have been a mop handle but the bucket was a crate with holes.

Then this documentary comes out following the lifetime movie and in two fleeting shots there is very clearly a full mop leaning on a bucket that is sitting in that crate.

Is this part of some conspiracy to prove me wrong?

The documentary was on HULU so I couldn't download it to examine that segment more closely. Does anyone have an alternate source for the documentary? I'd like to clean up this mess.

LOL. That is funny. I think there are actually 4 mops and 3 buckets, counting the one they wrapped as a Christmas present, and the partridge in a pear tree.

 

[Draca]

Is this part of some conspiracy to prove me wrong?

The documentary was on HULU so I couldn't download it to examine that segment more closely. Does anyone have an alternate source for the documentary? I'd like to clean up this mess.

I meant trying to figure out the lamp was driving nutso.

Barbie Nadeau brought the mop up in the documentary. She said they had suspicious behavior and the police found them waiting outside looking GUILTY and with MOP right outside.

SHE drives me nutso !!! She's been covering the case for years and still brings up the mop. No cleaning proven, no bleach used, no bleach bought, no blood on the mop. Why did she bring it up in that light? arghhh It's a crying shame the documentary featured Barbie and Nick.

 

[Kaosium]

Right, so without getting hung up on the word "conspiracy", the prosecution case IS indeed that the three conspired[1] to murder Meredith Kercher and lied about it afterwards. Any charge accusing more than one perpetrator of a crime is almost inevitably a "conspiracy theory"

Not exactly, a 'conspiracy theory' implies something different. There's been plenty of conspiracies in recorded history, but they seldom were they the recipients of theories in their honor, it's the ones that weren't actually conspiracies that generally get that distinction. A conspiracy theory offers a bizarre interpretation of events generally predicated on a number of 'suspicious' items that can't really be tied together into a coherent whole without handwaving away obvious objections.

I mean, coming across a break-in turned rape and murder and having a break-in artist arrested who admits to being at the scene and left his DNA and shoeprints in Meredith's blood seems like a pretty open and shut case, doesn't it?

Not with Mignini around! Instead, the college kids who have left no trace at the scene (bra clasp wasn't 'rediscovered' until 46 days later) who were arrested as a part of the previous theory must somehow be involved! They were there too, hacking away despite the lack of evidence, and they even staged the break-in! Then they came in the morning, had a quick shower, then called police as a way of furthering of their insidious plot!

by that definition. The judge in the case agreed with the prosecution case, which he didn't have to but is highly likely given he found them guilty.

Massei certainly gave the prosecution all the latitude it asked for, but I wonder if he didn't regret it having to write the Motivations Report and realizing how absurd it came across? Now his life will be defined by it, I suppose that's fitting being as his efforts potentially served to end the 'lives' of two others.

Therefore this thread adds no extra dimension to the discussion of the Knox case, and is a complete subset of the main Amanda Knox case thread, and should be merged with it.

You're really working on that twisted sense of humor! I'm impressed!

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Knox PR machine

kaosium,

I have not read every comment, so I may be retreading ideas here, but the notion of a big PR machine has always struck me as being odd. If a news story that is favorable to Ms. Knox comes out, the PR machine, sometimes with the phrase "million dollar" thrown in, is assumed by the commenter to be responsible. I have never seen anything factual, except for the hiring of David Marriott's firm, to back it up. It sounds a bit CTish to me. MOO.

EDT
A certain anonymous "Norbert" wrote elsewhere today, "Most of the individuals posting here have been either hired by the Knox Family's PR firm, are friends of the Knox family, or are groupies craving for attention." Thanks for the example, Norbert.

 

[Kaosium]

kaosium,

I have not read every comment, so I may be retreading ideas here, but the notion of a big PR machine has always struck me as being odd. If a news story that is favorable to Ms. Knox comes out, the PR machine, sometimes with the phrase "million dollar" thrown in, is assumed by the commenter to be responsible. I have never seen anything factual, except for the hiring of David Marriott's firm, to back it up. It sounds a bit CTish to me. MOO.

Oh, it's far more pernicious than a simple conspiracy theory! The David Marriott Machine has entangled even its most fervent detractors in its sordid schemes! Think on it a moment. Were you the twisted mastermind of a malevolent PR firm, what better publicity could there be than to convince even those who despise everything you work for that you are capable of not only mobilizing a parade of passionate posters on the internet at a moments notice, but to actually move the editorial positions of newspapers and other media outlets worldwide and garner positive coverage for a 'soulless murderess?' Imagine not only frustrating their worthy aims but to have them give you credit for doing so at the same time! Can there be any more complete a victory than that? Think of the free advertisement!

I dunno about you, but I'd never even heard of David Marriott or Gogerty-Marriott until this case, and perusing their 'blog' I'd have to say they sure didn't get Pat Gogerty as a part of the deal. Going back a year he doesn't mention Amanda Knox at all, but he seems very concerned with what's going on where I live! I'm tempted to tell him to get back to work helping Amanda Knox, she's not here but in Italy! We have a different sort of 'UW' around here, with a far superior football team. A much better professional team than his clients as well. I also can't help but notice he thinks the Vietnam anti-war protests here took place in the Nixon era, which is odd because LBJ was president. It was 'Hey, hey, LBJ...' not 'Hic! hic! Tricky Dick...'

A certain anonymous "Norbert" wrote elsewhere today, "Most of the individuals posting here have been either hired by the Knox Family's PR firm, are friends of the Knox family, or are groupies craving for attention." Thanks for the example, Norbert.

I wonder which ones he thought were 'hired?' Should we send him a bill?

He can pay me in 'groupies.'

 

[michellesings]

I meant trying to figure out the lamp was driving nutso.

Barbie Nadeau brought the mop up in the documentary. She said they had suspicious behavior and the police found them waiting outside looking GUILTY and with MOP right outside.

SHE drives me nutso !!! She's been covering the case for years and still brings up the mop. No cleaning proven, no bleach used, no bleach bought, no blood on the mop. Why did she bring it up in that light? arghhh It's a crying shame the documentary featured Barbie and Nick.

That had more to do on the part of the Movie's Producers, not the Documentary's Producers. I know that for 100% sure, because I spoke with them and they were 100% PASSIONATELY convinced of Amanda and Rafaelle's innocence. And fuming over how such a "wrong" could have happened. I think the Producer's couldn't allow the main part of the Documentary to be seen because it was such a stark contrast. Another words, it would have hurt the movie's credibility, and would have been joked out of existence if that makes sense. I can ASSURE you, however, every single person that was a part of making that Documentary was rooting for Amanda.

 

[stilicho]

....

If a news story that is favorable to Ms. Knox comes out, the PR machine, sometimes with the phrase "million dollar" thrown in, is assumed by the commenter to be responsible.

....

The blogosphere-style Knox promotions don't work quite that way. Nobody is paying you, for example, for your blog promoting their innocence. But you are promising one another credit. You post links to each others' web sites.

Your specific role is the "sciencey" guy and you have published numerous "sciencey" articles (complete with footnotes) promoting an advocacy position instead of an objective one. Why is that? Is that the kind of "science" you teach your students at UNCW?

At present the main role of the blogosphere--and the endless litany of books about what a wonderful soccer player Amanda was (before she got into the practice of stabbing her roommates in the throat)--is simply to raise her profile in the media and to keep her newsworthy. In reality, Amanda herself is settling in for the long haul and just waiting for the 26 years to pass by peaceably.

 

[RoseMontague]

In reality, Amanda herself is settling in for the long haul and just waiting for the 26 years to pass by peaceably.

The reality appears to me that Amanda and Raffaele and their families are fighting to win the appeal and win their freedom. I believe their chances are good.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

don't fall in love with your own ideas

Your specific role is the "sciencey" guy and you have published numerous "sciencey" articles (complete with footnotes) promoting an advocacy position instead of an objective one. Why is that? Is that the kind of "science" you teach your students at UNCW?

Stilicho,

I teach my students to do their chromatography (for example) in ethical ways: run standards, spike an unknown with a known compound to see whether or not they co-elute, do follow-up experiments. Ask the right if-then questions. You can get an idea of this in my discussion of the Patricia Stallings case. As one of my colleagues put it, "Don't fall in love with your own ideas."

A good criminal investigation has things in common with a good scientific investigation. Steve Moore quoted Vernon Geberth, “The investigators must keep in mind that their hypothesis is provisional. If new evidence emerges that suggests a different sequence of events, they must be willing to reassess and modify their hypothesis as the new facts dictate.” Elsewhere Steve Moore wrote, “Hunches are not bad, they just need to be allowed to die a natural death when evidence proves them wrong. The sign of an investigation run amok is when an initial hunch is nurtured and kept on life support long after evidence should have killed it.” It is passages such as these that make me trust Mr. Moore's impressions of the case, as much as anything.

 

[Kaosium]

The blogosphere-style Knox promotions don't work quite that way. Nobody is paying you, for example, for your blog promoting their innocence. But you are promising one another credit. You post links to each others' web sites.

Your specific role is the "sciencey" guy and you have published numerous "sciencey" articles (complete with footnotes) promoting an advocacy position instead of an objective one. Why is that? Is that the kind of "science" you teach your students at UNCW?

At present the main role of the blogosphere--and the endless litany of books about what a wonderful soccer player Amanda was (before she got into the practice of stabbing her roommates in the throat)--is simply to raise her profile in the media and to keep her newsworthy. In reality, Amanda herself is settling in for the long haul and just waiting for the 26 years to pass by peaceably.

A question about this. I can't recall for certain if it was you, but I believe someone dedicated to the idea of their guilt posted on this thread that they thought the 'murder knife' would be thrown out, but the bra-clasp retained. I remember in mid-October when SomeAlibi initiated his 'experiment' that he posted he also thought the knife would be disallowed, so it must not be anathema to believe that amongst prominent PMFers such as yourself. I personally suspect they will both be thrown into the Tiber, but I guess we'll find out in six weeks.

What I'm wonder though is if you'll still believe Amanda knifed anyone, or if a more plausible scenario has occurred to you? They went from Amanda covering her ears and cowering whilst Patrick did the killing to Amanda boldly hacking away in capriciousness without skipping a beat, so it's not like there's a scintilla of evidence to support her actually wielding any weapons, at least once the 'double-DNA knife' is removed from the equation and put back in the drawer where it spent the night of the murder peaceably undisturbed.

I also have a question about this 'PR campaign.' How do you think the American media actually works, and how would hiring any PR firm create a nationwide 'campaign' where there was otherwise no or little interest? I ask as I'm thinking about running for president, and since Amanda Knox seems to get more positive coverage in the US than any politician I can think of, I'm wondering if I go with this Marriott crew if I can get her home faster from the Oval Office?

 

[babycondor]

... I ask as I'm thinking about running for president, and since Amanda Knox seems to get more positive coverage in the US than any politician I can think of, I'm wondering if I go with this Marriott crew if I can get her home faster from the Oval Office?

You'd have my vote.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

sanity and lunacy

Your specific role is the "sciencey" guy and you have published numerous "sciencey" articles (complete with footnotes) promoting an advocacy position instead of an objective one. Why is that? Is that the kind of "science" you teach your students at UNCW?

stilicho,

Perhaps you should explain what you mean by an advocacy position versus an objective position. In case my last comment was not clear enough, my students would not put innocent people like Patricia Stallings away for life because they were too lazy to do their work properly. They would also be more suspicious of stupid prosecution theories such as that put forth in the Jane Mixer murder: a four year old John Ruelas, who was from another city, having a nosebleed over Ms. Mixer's body as Mr. Leiterman allegedly killed her.

That case brings to mind a cartoon showing a young scientist and an older scientist. The older one said something like, "Yes, the presence of peanut butter in the lunar rock samples could mean that the moon was once inhabited by beings with eating habits strangely similar to our own. But let's stop eating in the lab, anyway."

 

[stilicho]

stilicho,

Perhaps you should explain what you mean by an advocacy position versus an objective position. In case my last comment was not clear enough, my students would not put innocent people like Patricia Stallings away for life because they were too lazy to do their work properly. They would also be more suspicious of stupid prosecution theories such as that put forth in the Jane Mixer murder: a four year old John Ruelas, who was from another city, having a nosebleed over Ms. Mixer's body as Mr. Leiterman allegedly killed her.

That case brings to mind a cartoon showing a young scientist and an older scientist. The older one said something like, "Yes, the presence of peanut butter in the lunar rock samples could mean that the moon was once inhabited by beings with eating habits strangely similar to our own. But let's stop eating in the lab, anyway."

An advocacy position is one in which a scientist approaches a problem with a jaundiced eye. In this particular case, you have never applied the same sense of awe towards the forensics that convicted Rudy Guede.

There is only one Knox apologist who has ever applied their critique of the m.o. of the Italians "powers that be" to all equally and that's Harry Wilkens. Some of my correspondents at the PMF consider him mad but I object to that: he is nothing if not consistent.

Your anecdote in the conclusion reminds me of a joyous book I'd read when an adolescent. It is called Tom Eaton's Professor Otis T Firefly's Phantasmagoric Almanac.

(Source: http://wayoutjunk.blogspot.com/2008/01/otis-g-fireflys-phantasmagoric-almanac.html )

One of the pages has him explaining that extra-terrestrial coal-powered spaceships must have landed long ago in Pennsylvania to refuel. Why? Because there's a lot of coal in Pennsylvania and therefore it would be a logical place for coal-powered inter-galactic spaceships to land and refuel.

I recommend that book and you might even want to link to it on your blog.

Try something with your students. See if they can employ your methods to mount a campaign to free Rudy Guede.

 

[stilicho]

A question about this. I can't recall for certain if it was you, but I believe someone dedicated to the idea of their guilt posted on this thread that they thought the 'murder knife' would be thrown out, but the bra-clasp retained. I remember in mid-October when SomeAlibi initiated his 'experiment' that he posted he also thought the knife would be disallowed, so it must not be anathema to believe that amongst prominent PMFers such as yourself. I personally suspect they will both be thrown into the Tiber, but I guess we'll find out in six weeks.

I am actually from the JREF, thank you very much. It was I who invited people from the PMF to come over here to debate the nutters.

What I'm wonder though is if you'll still believe Amanda knifed anyone, or if a more plausible scenario has occurred to you? They went from Amanda covering her ears and cowering whilst Patrick did the killing to Amanda boldly hacking away in capriciousness without skipping a beat, so it's not like there's a scintilla of evidence to support her actually wielding any weapons, at least once the 'double-DNA knife' is removed from the equation and put back in the drawer where it spent the night of the murder peaceably undisturbed.

It's not plausible that the two knives were wielded only by Raffaele. They went for her throat directly. Raffaele tried to throttle her but, when she couldn't be stopped from screaming, both of them struck her in the throat with knives.

Amanda's tale about standing in the kitchen was a lie.

I also have a question about this 'PR campaign.' How do you think the American media actually works, and how would hiring any PR firm create a nationwide 'campaign' where there was otherwise no or little interest? I ask as I'm thinking about running for president, and since Amanda Knox seems to get more positive coverage in the US than any politician I can think of, I'm wondering if I go with this Marriott crew if I can get her home faster from the Oval Office?

Gogerty-Marriott wouldn't pay you a red cent. The Knox family engaged them only to produce an image that might convince Americans that their daughter wasn't a sex killer. The inconvenient truth that's intervened was her conviction in DEC 2009. That kind of spoils the whole project.

My recommendation to you is to keep your wallet in your pocket. Don't hire a PR firm if you're arrested and charged after stabbing your roommate in the throat and leaving her to die.

Spend that money on a good lawyer. Make sure your defence experts don't contradict each other. Don't take the stand; you'll look like an idiot.