Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kaosium]

Just a question here: Raffaele returned to the police station repeatedly, even late at night, without "lawyering up." What is the common Italian perception of lawyers and when to get one? In the U.S., we know/imagine from "CSI," "SVU" etc. that we need a lawyer if a police officer so much as says "Good morning, sir." How do they feel in Italy? Raffaele is a university student and the son of a doctor. He would have known how to get a lawyer if he thought he needed one, and his father certainly would have had some ideas about what to do. But would getting a lawyer have raised suspicions? Would that have been unusual in Italy, like announcing "I've got something to hide?" Would a lawyer have been permitted to sit with him and guide him during a "voluntary" interview? Could a lawyer have said "My client is done talking. You may only communicate through me . . ."? And if he had refused to come to the station "voluntarily," could the cops have dragged him out of his house in the middle of the night? And suppose Raffaele and/or Amanda had had the foresight to take their own tape recorders to their police interviews? Would that have been permitted? I have no doubt that Amanda and Raffaele were railroaded, but I think some of our discussion of what they coulda/shoulda done is based on our understanding of US/UK legal procedures. How do innocent (or guilty) people deal with the cops in Italy?

They lawyer up immediately, like Filomena and Laura did. To combat problems with police interrogations in the past, the Italian legal system implemented stringent protocols for the interrogation of suspects, which is why Amanda walking into that twelve cop overnight session had to legally be considered a 'witness' even though they obviously intended to put the screws to her like she was a mafia don. Here's a link which details some of the niceties of ILE regarding lawyers and interrogations:

(Audio and/or visual) Recording of interviews

Electronic recording of interviews is obligatory when the suspect is detained. Furthermore, a written summary is made of the interviews, however it can significantly differ from the recordings. The electronic recordings are made by special technicians, who are supervised by the judge.

Thus everything after the 1:45 AM 'stop order' (arrest) was issued by law had to be taped. The ILE testified that the entirety of the interrogation more or less took place after that time, but that they 'forgot.'

Presence of a lawyer during police interrogation

A lawyer can be present during police interrogations. In practice, however, the police try to prevent the lawyer from being present. For instance, they do not allow the suspect to call his lawyer, or they say they have called a duty solicitor but he has not answered the call, or they suggest that it would be better if the suspect did not contact his lawyer because this would be very expensive. Of course, if the suspect is very determined, he can have legal assistance.

In theory, the lawyer plays an active role if he is present, but it may be that he is prevented from so doing by the police.

The suspect has a right to immediate legal assistance. If the police, however, do not want the suspect to be assisted, they simply do not allow him to call his lawyer or they question him as a witness, since witnesses do not have the right to have legal assistance during questioning. A distinction, however, must be made between the investigation by the police on the one hand and the investigation by prosecutors in subsequent stages of the proceedings on the other.

The police tend to restrict the right to legal assistance, especially in the first stages of the proceedings, in order to get as much information as possible from the suspect.

A public prosecutor would never explicitly dare to do that. Very often, however, lawyers are silenced and not allowed to speak during an interview of the suspect before a public prosecutor.

An example of questioning the suspect as a witness can be found in the following murder case.

The suspect entered the police station as a witness at 15:00h. He got out at 7:00h the following day charged as a suspect and arrested and brought to jail. According to the written record of the interrogation he made a confession at about 5:00h after having been visited by a doctor and having been given two psychotropic drugs (Didergot and Aurorix). The lawyer was only called so that he could be given the written record of the interrogation. The written record, however, turned out to be fundamentally different from what was actually said and recorded on tape. The suspect never actually said that he had killed the victim and simply but incoherently answered in a confused way the questions of the public prosecutor. Notwithstanding the fact that the suspect at trial withdrew his confession, he was sentenced to 21 years mainly on the ground of the confession.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Kaosium - just an acknowledgement of your very well thought out response - no ranting or raving or trying t belittle like so many here try and do. That was a very good response, I was pleasantly surprised. Thankyou....

I do have one question and you do not have to answer if you do not feel like it because I know it is none of my business but, are you male or female? The reason I ask is because I feel the female posters on this site, and pretty much all of them, are a pleasure to debate with, are very well informed, while most of the males, and I won't name any but everyone knows who they are, are just the opposite. They are well informed as well, but take a totally different approach to debating than the females here. Needless to say, I prefer debateing with the females.

 

[lionking]

Or is it the banishment of the most profane?

What do you mean by this?

 

[Dan O.]

Today finally they have taken the real murderer of this story from beyond belief. It is an Ivorian of 22 years, they have found him in Germany. Papa I saw happy and smiling, but I for the moment am not calm 100% because I fear that he will invent strange things.

I stated my rationale, as did you. So they differ, surprise surprise. Your rationale has no greater validity than mine. We are both basing our opinions on our own expectation of human behavior in certain conditions, given the life experiences we have to date to inform that opinion.

All I saw was you stating an opinion and backing it with more opinion. I asked a few basic questions to probe the basis of your opinion such as

"How much would Raffaele know about Rudy at the time he makes the statement?

That he was a drifter, that he was an immigrant from the Ivory Coast, that he was black....everything the news had reported he likely knew.

Up through the 20th, the news on Rudy is quite sketchy. What I've found is "21 year-old native of Côte d 'Ivoire, who emigrated to Italy to' age of five years", "Rudy had found a house in Via De Canerino in the university area.", "All Perugia remember him as a bright, a promise of basketball, especially always accompanied by beautiful girls" (source)

Maybe you can dig up your source for Rudy being a drifter and why being black makes any difference.

Why would Raffaele believe Rudy would try to shift the blame to him instead of feeling relief as his father did? How many instances of something like this have ever happened in order for him to think this was de rigeur instead of the police now being able to sort it out and let him go?

I didn't say "would". I pointed out the fact that Rudy could try to shift the blame to Raffaele. Also note the wording that Raffaele uses: "but I for the moment am not calm 100% because I fear that he will invent strange things." Raffaele is not saying that he knows Rudy will "invent strange things", Raffaele is saying that it is his fear of Rudy doing so that keeps him from being 100% calm.


Don't you find it amazing that we can both read the same text and each of us think it says something completely different. This is what bias does. You see one word and read another. It's easier to see what you already expect to see than to actually see reality.

 

[Mary_H]

Hi halides1, and others,
If a guy is a murderer, why wouldn't he immediately lawyer up?
If a guy is a murderer, why would he continuously go to the police station of his own free will? Wouldn't he be suspicious when the police kept asking too many questions?
If a guy is a murderer, why, after spending the previous 4 days dealing with the cops and answering their questions, would he even answer a phone call at 10:00pm on a Monday night while having dinner with his new girlfriend at a friends apartment. Especially after smoking out and getting high?

The cops called to tell Raffaele to come on down, your the next person we want to talk to, once again, as we investigate the brutal, bloody murder of your new girlfriend's housemate and friend. Edgardo Giobbi, from the violent crime squad in Rome, was mathematically sure that he gave the order to bring both students in. "At that moment our attention was on Amanda and Raffaele. I decided that we needed to hear them together in order to study their reactions".

In some wierd twist of fate, though it was late, Raffaele, after asking if he could finish eating dinner, agreed to come back in to the Questura, once again. And he did so, as always, without a lawyer.

Why not ask the cops to do it in the morning?

Let's see, you helped kill a girl.
The cops are harrassing you. They call you late at night to come on down. And that doesn't send alarm bells a-ringin' in your head?!?
What more could they ask that couldn't be asked in the morning?
Ask yourself this, please, for the sake of discussion,
Is this is a sign of a man guilty of murder?

When he came to the police station, Raffaele brought along Amanda, who, after her housemate, -(who slept mere feet/meters from her), was brutally stabbed to her death, surely must have beeen frightened to be alone. She also did not have another place to stay. So what should she have done. Go and hang out at Raf's place by herself? Stay at Raf's friends apartment? I surely would not thinks so, especially with a cold-blooded murder on the loose!

So Raffaele show's up at the Questura late at night.
He didn't call a lawyer before he arrived. Why not? Wasn't he in the least bit suspicious of having been summoned late at night to come back in.
Wouldn't you be if you had done anything vicious or destructive?
Raffaele, was, by all accounts, a friggin' NERD. A naive nerd! Not some street hardended criminal!
Did Raffele even call his Father, -(whom he spoke to a few times every day), to tell him he was summoned, once again, to the Questura?

The cops have called him/them in "hear them together in order to study their reactions".
But for some reason they decided not to audio tape this interview. Nor do they even video tape it, though when it's Amanda's turn, -(who did not speak Italian as her native 1st language), they must have remembered, from all of the previous interviews with her, that this would present a problem when tryin' to undertand what the heck she means as she answered their questions...

Once more, I have to ask:
Is this what a man guilty of murder, who also allegedly tried to clean up his participation in a bloody murder, would do?...

Great points, RWVBWL. Add to that the fact that Raffaele's dad is sophisticated and well connected. If he had even one sniff, one iota of suspicion that Raffaele could have been involved in even the remotest way, Raffaele would have been on the train home long before November 5th.

 

[Kaosium]

Kaosium - just an acknowledgement of your very well thought out response - no ranting or raving or trying t belittle like so many here try and do. That was a very good response, I was pleasantly surprised. Thankyou....

I do have one question and you do not have to answer if you do not feel like it because I know it is none of my business but, are you male or female? The reason I ask is because I feel the female posters on this site, and pretty much all of them, are a pleasure to debate with, are very well informed, while most of the males, and I won't name any but everyone knows who they are, are just the opposite. They are well informed as well, but take a totally different approach to debating than the females here. Needless to say, I prefer debateing with the females.

LOL! Thanks for the compliment, but I guess I just use italics for emphasis instead.

No, I'm shamelessly male, though I may have a different perspective than some as I came so late to this debate. I'm also a 'veteran of a thousand ether wars' and learned long ago whatever posted only reflects on whomever posted it, it doesn't transfer by osmosis to whoever it's posted to. Maybe females, by and large, come with that option already installed, some studies have suggested women have the stronger communication skills.

At any rate I'm also 'retired' from this sort of thing, I gave up posting on serious subjects years back and just talk about TV shows or movies for the most part nowadays when I feel the urge. Color me jaded. Except last July I got stuck in the middle of Upstate New York without a remote (but it had wifi!) and had to find out why that girl was charged with 'slander' for such an innocuous thing. I figured she was probably guilty and all, I just didn't get the calunnia charge. Thus I discovered this, eventually saw behind the curtain, and have to see it out to the end.

 

[Justinian2]

You are wrong to say that I made any claim, I only asked for evidence that the claim was true, asking that I should prove it did not happen is an appeal to ignorance.

From wikipedia:

Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or appeal to ignorance, is an informal logical fallacy. It asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is: there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to "prove" the proposition to be either true or false.

The defense can only 'prove' innocence with either a valid alibi or by proving the absence of evidence. Proving the lack of evidence is to argue from ignorance and is comparable to requiring the prosecution to have a preponderance of evidence (the requirement for civil trials).

An argument from ignorance proves that the evidence is insufficient OR that the defendant is innocent. An argument from ignorance will not prove that the defendant is innocent - just that he's NOT guilty.

Argument from ignorance is acceptable for the defense, but entirely unacceptable, illegal, and perhaps even immoral for the prosecution.


I think appeals to ignorance are allowed the defense, but NOT the prosecution. The reason is that the main tool of the defense is to disprove the prosecution's evidence.

I would be innocent of the murder of Meredith because the prosecution could not produce evidence of an airline ticket that would place me in Perugia at the time of the murder. This is a argument from ignorance that would be valid.

Of course the great Mignini can fabricate evidence out of thin air! He could say I traveled under an alias and find a airplane ticket from my home city to Perugia in late October and, even though I've never been in Italy, he could prove otherwise. This would be know as an appeal to the ignorant.

 

[Danceme]

Up through the 20th, the news on Rudy is quite sketchy. What I've found is "21 year-old native of Côte d 'Ivoire, who emigrated to Italy to' age of five years", "Rudy had found a house in Via De Canerino in the university area.", "All Perugia remember him as a bright, a promise of basketball, especially always accompanied by beautiful girls" (source)

The article you linked didn't say what you quoted. You must have provided the incorrect link. The article you quoted says;

"This would be a figure linked to the world of drugs, of African origin (perhaps Côte d 'Ivoire), already touched by the suspect to' start 's investigation into the' killing of Meredith. His name had already appeared during the first interrogation of Amanda Knox, the American flatmate of Meredith, then stopped with the 'accused of conspiring to murder with Raffaele Sollecito, the boyfriend of Apulia and Patrick Lumumba, owner of the pub where he worked as Pierre. His capture would complete the picture even permanently confused yellow Perugia and finally allow to understand the true motive. And above all, could have a decisive role in the fate of Patrick Lumumba and Raffaele Sollecito."

Maybe you can dig up your source for Rudy being a drifter and why being black makes any difference.

Describing Rudy as being black, son of a poor immigrant, and a drifter only serves to contrast him with the white, wealthy, prominent urologist's son that Raffaele was. Being black has no negative connotations for me at all personally as I live within a very diverse culture, but there's no denying it does have negative connotations for others. However, there's no way of knowing how Raffaele and his family thought.

I didn't say "would". I pointed out the fact that Rudy could try to shift the blame to Raffaele. Also note the wording that Raffaele uses: "but I for the moment am not calm 100% because I fear that he will invent strange things." Raffaele is not saying that he knows Rudy will "invent strange things", Raffaele is saying that it is his fear of Rudy doing so that keeps him from being 100% calm.

Sorry I used the word "would" instead of "could", my oversight, and the rest of your statement is semantically true. At issue was why he would feel this way instead of hopeful.

Don't you find it amazing that we can both read the same text and each of us think it says something completely different. This is what bias does. You see one word and read another. It's easier to see what you already expect to see than to actually see reality.

Do you see your own bias informing how you have chosen to interpret the statement, or just mine?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

North versus South

To all,

Some reading I did suggested that Raffaele, who came from southern Italy, might be a bit of an outsider in Perugia. I don't recall where I read this, but it might be worth exploring. Also, I would ask what Raffaele might know or feel about the police based upon the experiences of his friends.
EDT
not that Raffaele's friends necessarily had any direct experience. I am just speculating.

 

[Kaosium]

To all,

Some reading I did suggested that Raffaele, who came from southern Italy, might be a bit of an outsider in Perugia. I don't recall where I read this, but it might be worth exploring. Also, I would ask what Raffaele might know or feel about the police based upon the experiences of his friends.
EDT
not that Raffaele's friends necessarily had any direct experience. I am just speculating.

Being as his sister was an officer with the Carabinieri I imagine his opinion of the police took a nosedive with his arrest and incarceration. The best part about reading his diary is his 'evaluation' of the intelligence of the Polizia di Stato.

He is from Apullia, which if I recall correctly is the very heel of the 'boot' and is considered 'hillbilly country' by some in Italy. I get the impression of West Virginia without the mountains. Depressed economy, they talk funny, but very proud and family oriented. So in someplace like Perugia, so close to Rome, he may well be an outsider.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

To all,

Some reading I did suggested that Raffaele, who came from southern Italy, might be a bit of an outsider in Perugia. I don't recall where I read this, but it might be worth exploring. Also, I would ask what Raffaele might know or feel about the police based upon the experiences of his friends.
EDT
not that Raffaele's friends necessarily had any direct experience. I am just speculating.

Power and money has always been concentrated in the North and generally I guess people from the South are treated and regarded differently, Raffaele's accent would have made his origins obvious to any Perugian. On the other hand Perugia is a University town a relatively small population swelled by the student population from all over Europe and further a field so one would conclude they are use to people from different parts of the world if not Italy. I assume there would be a kind of local resentment of the student population whilst at the same time a local economy which is based around students, housing for example with students money comes a sub-culture of clubs, drinking and drug use to varying degree a seedier sub-culture although not exclusively based around immigrants (African, Albanians for example) dealing to students and locals a like.

I assume local police turned a blind eye to student excesses and local people involved in the seedier side of university life, although I assume the police through intelligence and informants would know who was who and carry out periodic clamp downs on clubs, drinking and drugs alike.

From a law enforcement point of view I assume there would be the natural professional rivalry between local police like the Postal police and Carabineri which is a national police force, I believe in the case of Meredith's murder the Postal police were first on the scene which meant it was their case, whether this resulted in the type of rivalry that is depicted in American TV programmes between local law enforcement and FBI for example I am unsure.

 

[el buscador]

Quote from an Italian Vanity Fair article dated today:

"Antonio Curatolo, recently arrested in execution of an order for a combination of convictions related to drug dealing, is currently imprisoned. "

Curious, a combination of convictions? What all did curatolo do?

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/meredith-takes-up-the-appeal-process-t813.html

 

[Kaosium]

Quote from an Italian Vanity Fair article dated today:

"Antonio Curatolo, recently arrested in execution of an order for a combination of convictions related to drug dealing, is currently imprisoned. "

Curious, a combination of convictions? What all did curatolo do?

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/meredith-takes-up-the-appeal-process-t813.html

Anything it took to get him inside, cleaned up, sober, and primed and ready to remember his lines, this time.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

penalty kick

There was some discussion over the penalties faced with respect to interrogations. A soccer (football) coach's courtroom interrogation charge was profiled in the Daily Mail, "Under Italian law, a person found guilty of withholding information in court can be jailed for up to six years.

 

[Magister]

Details about the forthcoming hearings on 12th and 26th March


http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/News/C...ppello-di-Amanda-e-Raffaele_311775118688.html

 

[RWVBWL]

The tie's that bind...

Great points, RWVBWL. Add to that the fact that Raffaele's dad is sophisticated and well connected. If he had even one sniff, one iota of suspicion that Raffaele could have been involved in even the remotest way, Raffaele would have been on the train home long before November 5th.

Greetings Mary H,
Here is something else that I find very odd, especially when I look at the whole picture regarding the brutal murder of Meredith Kerecher.

Did you know that after Raffaele Sollecito was arrested and imprisoned, he was placed in solitairy confinement and was not allowed access to a lawyer until his 1st hearing in front of a judge?

I can not even begin to understand how a young adult, who was not a hardend criminal, but a man without any prior convictions, who even had a sister who herself was a police officer, could have dealt with this tragedy befalling himself.

I've mentioned this before, but doesn't everyone think off their own self-preservation at some point in a personal crisis? Wouldn't this be a personal crisis for Raffaele Sollecito?

Wouldn't Raffaele,
-(after coming down off the THC high he was on when he was interviewed the previous night and then arrrested and imprisoned),
have realized the serious consequences of what was happening as he sat alone in a prison cell for the 1st time in his life?!?

This makes me wonder why would Raffele Sollecito protect Rudy Guede, who had not even been arrested yet?
Why not turn on him?

This murder we discuss has 3 co-conspirators. Amanda is the pivotal member.
Amanda knew of Rudy, if you can call it that, longer than she knew Raffaele.
But Raffaele had never even met Rudy Guede.
It's not like they grew up together.
What did Rudy enjoy? Playin' basketball and hitting the clubs?
Raffaele and Body Roga, as Rudy was nick-named by 1 of the boyz downstairs in reference to Serbian basketball star Dejan Bodiroga never even played basketball together.
Nor were they party buddies who went out on the prowl in the nightclubs around town, wingmen, so to say.
"You got my back?"
"I got your back"...

So why would Raffaele protect Rudy?
Raffaele's DNA was not found inside Meredith Kercher nor on her body anywhere. Only Rudy's...
And so I have to wonder why, after his high was over and he awoke in a prison cell for the 1st time in his life, locked up in solitude, didn't he realize the trouble he was in and turn against a guy that never previously knew?

Why not call for Mignini and give him a gift, so to say, naming Rudy Guede as the main suspect and agree to testify against him in return for a reduced sentence?Doesn't that ever happen in Italy? Don't mafia gangsters or other co-conspirator criminal hoodlums ever turn on each other there?

How was the tie binding Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede together so strong that Raffaele never turned on Rudy?

It surely couldn't be that there was never any tie binding these 2 men together and Raffaele is simply the victim of a sadly injust, wrongful conviction of participating the brutal, bloody murder of Miss Meredith Kercher, could it?

I'll ponder this a bit more as I hang out on the beach tomorrow...
Take it easy, Mary H, and others.
RW

PS-Hi CoulsdonUK,
As it was a cartwheel that has brought forth many thousands of postings,
12 words did indeed get me interested enough to post again the other day. As did Mary H's kind response that I just read tonight. I enjoy reading your posts, even though I believe in Raffaele and Amanda's innocence, and I hope that you continue to participate in discussion as the Appeal's wind their way thru the Italian court system.

I also really like your avatar, it reminds me of being a kid when my Father, who's deceased, would drive us, well never mind...
Isn't Coulsdon where Meredith Kercher's family lived?

 

[Justinian2]

What do you mean by this?

What do you mean? Does this mean that you killed Meredith? I mean it suggests to me that you are trying to divert the blame from yourself by accusing others.

Where were you November 1st? Can you prove it?

Guede said that you helped him. Your DNA has been found on the recently discovered murder weapon.

How would you like to wake up to this one fine morning?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Greetings Mary H,
Here is something else that I find very odd, especially when I look at the whole picture regarding the brutal murder of Meredith Kerecher.

Did you know that after Raffaele Sollecito was arrested and imprisoned, he was placed in solitairy confinement and was not allowed access to a lawyer until his 1st hearing in front of a judge?

I can not even begin to understand how a young adult, who was not a hardend criminal, but a man without any prior convictions, who even had a sister who herself was a police officer, could have dealt with this tragedy befalling himself.

I've mentioned this before, but doesn't everyone think off their own self-preservation at some point in a personal crisis? Wouldn't this be a personal crisis for Raffaele Sollecito?

Wouldn't Raffaele,
-(after coming down off the THC high he was on when he was interviewed the previous night and then arrrested and imprisoned),
have realized the serious consequences of what was happening as he sat alone in a prison cell for the 1st time in his life?!?

This makes me wonder why would Raffele Sollecito protect Rudy Guede, who had not even been arrested yet?
Why not turn on him?

This murder we discuss has 3 co-conspirators. Amanda is the pivotal member.
Amanda knew of Rudy, if you can call it that, longer than she knew Raffaele.
But Raffaele had never even met Rudy Guede.
It's not like they grew up together.
What did Rudy enjoy? Playin' basketball and hitting the clubs?
Raffaele and Body Roga, as Rudy was nick-named by 1 of the boyz downstairs in reference to Serbian basketball star Dejan Bodiroga never even played basketball together.
Nor were they party buddies who went out on the prowl in the nightclubs around town, wingmen, so to say.
"You got my back?"
"I got your back"...

So why would Raffaele protect Rudy?
Raffaele's DNA was not found inside Meredith Kercher nor on her body anywhere. Only Rudy's...
And so I have to wonder why, after his high was over and he awoke in a prison cell for the 1st time in his life, locked up in solitude, didn't he realize the trouble he was in and turn against a guy that never previously knew?

Why not call for Mignini and give him a gift, so to say, naming Rudy Guede as the main suspect and agree to testify against him in return for a reduced sentence?Doesn't that ever happen in Italy? Don't mafia gangsters or other co-conspirator criminal hoodlums ever turn on each other there?

How was the tie binding Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede together so strong that Raffaele never turned on Rudy?

It surely couldn't be that there was never any tie binding these 2 men together and Raffaele is simply the victim of a sadly injust, wrongful conviction of participating the brutal, bloody murder of Miss Meredith Kercher, could it?

I'll ponder this a bit more as I hang out on the beach tomorrow...
Take it easy, Mary H, and others.
RW

PS-Hi CoulsdonUK,
As it was a cartwheel that has brought forth many thousands of postings,
12 words did indeed get me interested enough to post again the other day. As did Mary H's kind response that I just read tonight. I enjoy reading your posts, even though I believe in Raffaele and Amanda's innocence, and I hope that you continue to participate in discussion as the Appeal's wind their way thru the Italian court system.

I also really like your avatar, it reminds me of being a kid when my Father, who's deceased, would drive us, well never mind...
Isn't Coulsdon where Meredith Kercher's family lived?

The avatar is of a Bradmore Green pond in what is locally known as Old Coulsdon just opposite is St John’s Church parts of which have existed since 11th century. Apart from the fact that the Kercher family live in the area hence my initial and ongoing interest, my daughter read the same degree as Meredith although she opted for French. We also have four children, but I doubt that I would have had the grace and quiet dignity that the Kercher family have shown over the years; I indentify and empathise completely with the Kercher family, there but for the grace of God could go I.

As for Raffaele and Amanda their culpability is yet to be determined.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

There was some discussion over the penalties faced with respect to interrogations. A soccer (football) coach's courtroom interrogation charge was profiled in the Daily Mail, "Under Italian law, a person found guilty of withholding information in court can be jailed for up to six years.

I recall after Ayrton Senna was killed in the San Marino Grand Prix in 94, that the owner (Frank Williams) and Chief designer of team he drove for where initial held responsible for the crash and went through various trials in Italy.

I am surprised that you quoted from the Daily Mail I thought that newspaper was an anathema to Raffaele and Amanda’s supporters.

Some reading I did suggested that Raffaele, who came from southern Italy, might be a bit of an outsider in Perugia. I don't recall where I read this, but it might be worth exploring. Also, I would ask what Raffaele might know or feel about the police based upon the experiences of his friends.

I am curious, what are your views of what Raffaele may have experienced in Perugia?

 

[Justinian2]

Had Amanda and Raffaele helped Guede

Had Amanda and Raffaele helped Guede, I would have expected EVERYTHING to be different. Everything they said would be different. There would be blood evidence, fingerprint evidence, cell phone evidence, computer evidence, murder weapon evidence, eyewitness evidence, squealing on each other, different statements in the interrogation, prior evidence of corroboration, a different staged break-in (one that didn't point to Guede's MO), a motive, tape recorded information from the bugging, testimony from cellmates and on and on.

Has anyone an idea in support of, or against this opinion/theory?

Guede's behavior is typical as is the evidence against him. Amanda and Raffaele should have had more evidence against them than Guede since they were found, questioned and watched early.

Also, the huge number of mistakes made by the police and the prosecution should have been cause to suspect the police and prosecution of wrongdoing. The trouble is that Italy allows vexatious litigation and other forms of severe harrassment against suspects. So who can accuse the police and prosecutor of any wrong doing?