The Massei/Mignini Conspiracy Theory

[quadraginta]

quadraginta, are you still holding the claim^* that Amanda would have needed to use her desk lamp sometime in the last few days before the murder?Are you ever going to try to prove that claim with specifics such as: When was Amanda in her room at a time that the natural light wasn't sufficient to render that tiny desk lamp insignificant for the purpose of illuminating the room?

(*katy_did actually made this claim in post 759 but quadraginta is the one arguing for it)

I wasn't arguing anything at all. Wherever did you get that idea?

All I did was post a query about LJ's comment that she didn't need the lamp because she had a working overhead light in her room, since I thought I recalled that it had been determined she hadn't. It seems that my recollection was correct. (At least, if you're willing to take Knox's word for it.)

If you're going to make up imaginary arguments you don't need me. Just argue with yourself.

I'll still be as entertained by the dialogue.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I wasn't arguing anything at all. Wherever did you get that idea?

All I did was post a query about LJ's comment that she didn't need the lamp because she had a working overhead light in her room, since I thought I recalled that it had been determined she hadn't. It seems that my recollection was correct. (At least, if you're willing to take Knox's word for it.)

If you're going to make up imaginary arguments you don't need me. Just argue with yourself.

I'll still be as entertained by the dialogue.

Did you actually have a point that was relevant to the Knox case? I'm currently unable to see what it might have been, so maybe you should explain it.

 

[quadraginta]

Did you actually have a point that was relevant to the Knox case? I'm currently unable to see what it might have been, so maybe you should explain it.

I had a question that was relevant to the Knox case. Does that bother you?

The "point" which prompted the question was one of LJ's. (Here ... and here.) You'll need to consult him if you have any complaints, challenges, or taunts pertaining to its relevance.

The subsequent responses to my query were largely from Knox advocates, one of whom supported my recollections. (Thanks again, babycondor. ) You'll need to consult them if you have any complaints, challenges, or taunts pertaining to their relevance.

 

[Dan O.]

I wasn't arguing anything at all. Wherever did you get that idea?

Then it holds without opposition that Amanda's lamp could have been in Meredith's room for up to 6 days without Amanda necessarily noticing it missing due to a need for artificial light in her room.

Thanks for participating.

 

[quadraginta]

Then it holds without opposition that Amanda's lamp could have been in Meredith's room for up to 6 days without Amanda necessarily noticing it missing due to a need for artificial light in her room.

"Could" is the operative term here. This does not address how likely it would be that the absence of the only functional artificial light source in her room would go unnoticed for any significant length of time, an issue so far dismissed with vague assertions that she had 'spent all her time' at Sollecito's apartment.

That likelihood is significantly affected by such a detail.

After all, the murder "could" have been committed by Killer Clowns From Outer Space, or a lovelorn Sasquatch that had followed Knox to Perugia from the wilds of suburban Seattle.

How likely that is would also be a different issue.

Thanks for participating.

You're quite welcome.

 

[Dan O.]

"Could" is the operative term here. This does not address how likely it would be that the absence of the only functional artificial light source in her room would go unnoticed for any significant length of time, an issue so far dismissed with vague assertions that she had 'spent all her time' at Sollecito's apartment.

The assertion was that she was spending the nights and evenings at Raffaele's apartment and coming home in the morning to shower and change. We don't have her schedule for the entire week but we do know from her own testimony about what time she left the cottage on both Oct 31 and Nov. 1. If she lied about this you could bet Mignini would jump on her with evidence from the phone records.

Around 2 pm on the 31st Amanda goes to Le Chic where she stays for a while and then meets up with Spiros near Merlin's and they go to a third bar later, the friends leave Amanda in the center of Old Town where Raffaele meets her and they go back to his place.

On Nov. 1, Amanda returns home in the late morning and Raffaele joins her later and proceeds to prepare lunch. They leave the cottage around 4-5 pm perhaps by way of Old Town to pick up ingredients for diner.​

So if Meredith borrowed Amanda's lamp after Amanda left on the afternoon of Oct 31, Amanda would not have subsequently been in the cottage at anytime she needed to use the lamp (late evenings and night). Much earlier I posted the theory that Meredith could have borrowed the lamp to put on or photograph the makup for her vampire costume. Meredith herself would not have a chance to return the lamp since she returns very late and is rushed the next day to get ready for the pizza party.

 

[Matthew Best]

I admit I'm unsure what the lamp is supposed to prove either way. We don't know how it got into Kercher's room, or when. That's pretty much all we can say, so I don't see how it is supposed to demonstrate anything regarding the guilt or innocence of anybody.

 

[RoseMontague]

I admit I'm unsure what the lamp is supposed to prove either way. We don't know how it got into Kercher's room, or when. That's pretty much all we can say, so I don't see how it is supposed to demonstrate anything regarding the guilt or innocence of anybody.

Mignini and Maresca both implied in their questioning of Amanda that the attempt by Raffaele to break down the door was to retrieve the lamp that they suddenly realized they had left in Meredith's room during the alleged cleanup (after they had locked the door and ditched the keys).

I have seen those that believe in guilt endorse this theory as well. Then again I have seen the same posters claim that Raffaele could have broken down the door if he really wanted to and it was just attempted to show the cops that they had tried.

My personal theory is that the investigators or one of the LE personnel brought the lamp in there to better observe the crime scene and Mignini just decided to use the presence of the lamp against Amanda and Raffaele.

Then there are other theories like the one from DanO's that Meredith borrowed the lamp for some reason.

 

[odeed]

The assertion was that she was spending the nights and evenings at Raffaele's apartment and coming home in the morning to shower and change. We don't have her schedule for the entire week but we do know from her own testimony about what time she left the cottage on both Oct 31 and Nov. 1. If she lied about this you could bet Mignini would jump on her with evidence from the phone records.

Around 2 pm on the 31st Amanda goes to Le Chic where she stays for a while and then meets up with Spiros near Merlin's and they go to a third bar later, the friends leave Amanda in the center of Old Town where Raffaele meets her and they go back to his place.

On Nov. 1, Amanda returns home in the late morning and Raffaele joins her later and proceeds to prepare lunch. They leave the cottage around 4-5 pm perhaps by way of Old Town to pick up ingredients for diner.​

So if Meredith borrowed Amanda's lamp after Amanda left on the afternoon of Oct 31, Amanda would not have subsequently been in the cottage at anytime she needed to use the lamp (late evenings and night). Much earlier I posted the theory that Meredith could have borrowed the lamp to put on or photograph the makup for her vampire costume. Meredith herself would not have a chance to return the lamp since she returns very late and is rushed the next day to get ready for the pizza party.

I have no idea where you get that Knox left at 2pm on the 31st October to go to Le Chic, her own testimony suggests it was in the evening and met up with Sollecito later.

LG: I see. No, can you tell us what happened on the 31st, the evening of Halloween?

AK: Yes. I went to Le Chic, Patrick's pub, I spent a little while there, and then
I joined a friend of mine, Spiros, a friend I had met around town, in a bar
where you could use internet, and I joined him near Merlin, but we didn't
enter, in fact he was just coming out, so we went to a different place, and
then I was tired, so they left me in the center and Raffaele joined me, and we
went to his house.

LG: At what time?

AK: Around 2, maybe?

LG: And did you know what Meredith was doing that evening?

AK: Um, she said that she was going out with the girls, so...

LG: You sent her a text message on that evening, to Meredith?

AK: Certainly. I asked her if she wanted to meet me, and I think she answered that
she was going with the girls.

GCM: Excuse me, when you say "the girls", you are referring to...

AK: The English girls. That group.

GCM: Meredith's English friends?

LG: Yes. But the message that Meredith sent you on October 31 2007, at
19:04, "yes I have a party, but I have to go to a friend's house for dinner--"

AK: Oh, right.

LG: "what's your program? x" What does "x" mean? A kiss?

AK: Yes, a kiss. "x" is a kiss.

LG: Do you remember this message?

AK: Yes, yes. In fact the day after Halloween, the 1st of November, she was telling
me about it when she woke up. She explained to me that the Halloween party
that they--there was this--they had made a kind of pink fruit juice, and a
hand made of ice that they put inside it. She thought that was really ghostly.

LG: So, to this test message of 19:04, you answered with another, at 20:03 still
on October 31, saying "I'm going to Le Chic for a bit, and afterwards who
knows, maybe we'll see each other. Call me. What are you doing this evening?
Do you want to meet? Do you have a costume?"

AK: Yes.

 

[Dan O.]

I have no idea where you get that Knox left at 2pm on the 31st October to go to Le Chic, her own testimony suggests it was in the evening and met up with Sollecito later.

If you are saying that "around 2" is the time Amanda returned to Raffaele's place and not the time she went to La Chic, that is a reasonable alternate interpretation. There is still nothing that places Amanda at her cottage in the evening when artificial light would be needed in her room.

From the text exchange on the evening of the 31st we can see that Amanda was not present when Meredith was dressing up as the vampire. Are there any statements from Meredith's friends for when Meredith joined them that evening?

 

[odeed]

If you are saying that "around 2" is the time Amanda returned to Raffaele's place and not the time she went to La Chic, that is a reasonable alternate interpretation. There is still nothing that places Amanda at her cottage in the evening when artificial light would be needed in her room.

From the text exchange on the evening of the 31st we can see that Amanda was not present when Meredith was dressing up as the vampire. Are there any statements from Meredith's friends for when Meredith joined them that evening?

How do you know that the text message from Meredith was when she was dressing up as a vampire, "yes I have a party, but I have to go to a friend's house for dinner--", we know for certain that Meredith had several friends, who did not live in the same place, one could assume she was at one friends about to leave to go to another.

From Knox's testimony she did go to Le Chic, her first stop until sometime after 8pm, at least 2 hours after sunset, and she does not mention being at Sollecito's flat before hand, and the only other place is her cottage, where she went back the next day to get change.

You assert that these two lovebirds spent at least 12/13 hours a day together, but testimony for Halloween sort of contradicts that, considering that Knox had to wander around a foreign city alone at night until she bumped into someone (not Sollecito), a bit callous of Sollecito not to invite his girlfriend out on what was a party night.

 

[Matthew Best]

Still not sure how this helps establish the guilt or innocence of anyone.

Though I admit demonstrating Sollecito's "callousness" in not inviting his girlfriend of a week or so out on Halloween does tend to suggest he's capable of murder.

 

[odeed]

Still not sure how this helps establish the guilt or innocence of anyone.

Though I admit demonstrating Sollecito's "callousness" in not inviting his girlfriend of a week or so out on Halloween does tend to suggest he's capable of murder.

It doesn't, read my post again, I never mentioned the guilt or innocence, so don't make assertions that I was.

 

[Matthew Best]

It doesn't, read my post again, I never mentioned the guilt or innocence, so don't make assertions that I was.

Read my post again - where did I assert anything about you? Please feel free to quote me!

 

[Dan O.]

How do you know that the text message from Meredith was when she was dressing up as a vampire, "yes I have a party, but I have to go to a friend's house for dinner--", we know for certain that Meredith had several friends, who did not live in the same place, one could assume she was at one friends about to leave to go to another.

The question "Do you have a costume?" is an obvious indicator that Amanda was not present when Meredith put her costume on.

You assert that these two lovebirds spent at least 12/13 hours a day together, but testimony for Halloween sort of contradicts that, considering that Knox had to wander around a foreign city alone at night until she bumped into someone (not Sollecito), a bit callous of Sollecito not to invite his girlfriend out on what was a party night.

My assertion was that Amanda had not been home at a time when she would have needed to use her desk lamp to illuminate her room since Meredith had dressed up as the vampire. This assertion is backed by Amanda's testimony and the text that shows Amanda was not aware that Meredith had a costume that evening. Where is your support for your side of the claim that Meredith could not have borrowed Amanda's lamp without Amanda noticing?


You also haven't backed your assertion that Raffaele did not invite Amanda out on the 31st. All we know is that Raffaele went to a party with a friend and Amanda went to La Chic. Raffaele later sent a text to Amanda and they met up and went back to his place.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

My assertion was that Amanda had not been home at a time when she would have needed to use her desk lamp to illuminate her room since Meredith had dressed up as the vampire. This assertion is backed by Amanda's testimony and the text that shows Amanda was not aware that Meredith had a costume that evening. Where is your support for your side of the claim that Meredith could not have borrowed Amanda's lamp without Amanda noticing?
<snip>

Your assertion actually seems to be that Knox would not have noticed that her lamp was missing from her room unless she needed to use it. At least, that seems to be the premise you are asking to be defended.

There is no reason to believe that she would have been unable to notice the lamp's absence in the daylight. Or that she would have failed to notice its absence unless she wanted to turn it on. It isn't like the bedroom was over-furnished or anything.

Maybe you're having some trouble working out what you're objecting to.

 

[Matthew Best]

Gosh this is interesting.

 

[Dan O.]

Gosh this is interesting.

Same old same old. when they can't attack what you actually write they make something up and claim you wrote it then attack that.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Your assertion actually seems to be that Knox would not have noticed that her lamp was missing from her room unless she needed to use it. At least, that seems to be the premise you are asking to be defended.

There is no reason to believe that she would have been unable to notice the lamp's absence in the daylight. Or that she would have failed to notice its absence unless she wanted to turn it on. It isn't like the bedroom was over-furnished or anything.

Maybe you're having some trouble working out what you're objecting to.

If you've gotten as far as merely acknowledging the reasonable possibility that the lamp might have gotten to where it was without being in any way involved with the murder, that's the end of the lamp as relevant evidence.

A good thing too - it was nearly as silly as the mop.

 

[quadraginta]

If you've gotten as far as merely acknowledging the reasonable possibility that the lamp might have gotten to where it was without being in any way involved with the murder, that's the end of the lamp as relevant evidence.

"Possibility" in this context is a weasel word, just as "could" was several posts earlier. "Reasonable" is a matter of conjecture, or perhaps wishful thinking.

A good thing too - it was nearly as silly as the mop.

The fact is that the lamp was found on the floor behind a locked door in the murdered girl's bedroom, not on a table in Knox's room as it should have been.

It is not common to find a desk lamp on a floor. Murdered girls are not (thankfully) particularly common either. It has not been shown that it was common for Meredith to casually borrow Knox's lamp.

Taken in concert these things merit consideration, at the very least. Attempts to blithely dismiss them as "silly" exhibits more of that wishful thinking, a degree of confirmation bias that surprises me coming from you, since you so often condemn it so vigorously when you imagine you perceive it in others.