The Massei/Mignini Conspiracy Theory

[Kevin_Lowe]

"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.

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.

I think not. I have commented in the past that some people, possibly influenced by detective fiction, have the strange idea that every unusual observation related to the case must be incorporated into the murder narrative somehow. They don't grasp the fact that if you examine the circumstances of any crime in sufficient detail you will find as many "strange" anomalies as you care to find.

Examine one hundred unrelated items and you will find at least five with p<=0.05 that have nothing whatsoever to do with the murder. That's assuming that you are unbiased and rational, of course. It is possible, indeed probable ()that dyed-in-the-wool guilters could find ninety-five things they could somehow construe to be p<=0.05. (Need I cite the mop, the luminol footprints, Amanda buying clothing and so on in addition to the lamp?).

If the lamp's position is perfectly adequately explained by the proposal that the deceased borrowed the lamp while her housemate was away, it's can't be evidence that the deceased was murdered.

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.

I have also commented in the past that guilters seem to appropriate and recycle all criticisms aimed at them, although those criticisms lose all relevance much of the time when they do so. Thus we've seen PMFers who exhibit multiple documented cult-like behaviours accusing the JREF of being a cult, scientific illiterates calling the pro-innocence case "anti-science" and so on.

Adopting the language of a rationalist doesn't make you one, unfortunately.

 

[LondonJohn]

"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.




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.

Are you sure it's a "fact" that the lamp was behind the locked door when it was broken open in the presence of the police? Just as it's a "fact" that Battistelli went no further than the doorway when the door was broken open...?

And, BTW, "reasonable" and "possibility" are not weasel words here. "Reasonable" does not mean the same thing in a legal context as it does in its more usual colloquial context of "not too bad". Likewise, "possibility" is all the defence has to aim for (of course, the prosecution/court has a higher hurdle of near-certain probability to clear).

 

[Matthew Best]

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.

And this proves what, exactly?

How do we get from "there was a lamp in Kercher's room" to "Knox is the murderer"?

 

[RoseMontague]

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.

For the most part I agree with you. You should know however that Meredith kept her desk lamp on the floor as well (next to the head of her bed). So if she did borrow it and left it on the floor, that would not be unusual.

I consider the lamp as having more importance than the mop(s). The problem I see with the lamp as evidence is that the people standing at the door when it was broken down never mention the lamp or the lamp cord that had to be right in front of them judging by the pictures. If you can find such a statement or quote, it would be helpful. The description of the lamp and its location come later from the medical personnel and investigators including Stefanoni. At this point, I consider the lamp being introduced to the room by LE as a reasonable theory.

 

[Kaosium]

I've a tendency to think the lamp is just one more example of Mignini's desperation to 'prove' a clean-up. It seems in his mind absence of evidence is evidence of...a clean-up! With that way of thinking a misplaced lamp becomes 'evidence' of something he can't find real evidence for and which the crime scene disproves anyway. Outside a cursory clean-up Rudy might have done with the towels and perhaps on obvious things in the bathroom, there's things not disturbed that should have been had a real clean up actually occurred. The shoe prints all over the murder room for one, how do those get left if there was an actual clean-up? Especially as the tread was close enough to Raffaele's it would cause the police to think they were his for 45 days after the discovery of the murder?

In the hall there are the barely visible shoeprints in blood going to the door and the luminol hits which were not smeared and invisible which they would have had to mop around and miss despite not even knowing where they were. The bathroom would not have had the blood spots in the sink, the dump in the toilet, or the blood on the bathmat if anyone had really spent some time cleaning it up. It was, as FBI agent Steve Moore notes, an undisturbed crime scene, especially in the murder room.

The 'evidence' for the clean-up becomes that Mignini 'needs' one to explain how his erstwhile 'murderers' left no trace, and a lamp which no one can account for and completely ignores the fact no part of the crime scene bears traces of more than a cursory 'clean-up' and certainly most everything else suggests nothing of significance was actually cleaned up. It is only slightly more honest than broadcasting to the world you have a bleach receipt that doesn't actually exist.

 

[Draca]

For the most part I agree with you. You should know however that Meredith kept her desk lamp on the floor as well (next to the head of her bed). So if she did borrow it and left it on the floor, that would not be unusual.

Why do you say this Rose? Did one of the flatmates say she did that?

 

[RoseMontague]

Why do you say this Rose? Did one of the flatmates say she did that?

It is in the pictures. The position of the lamp looks like it is there so she can turn it on and off without getting out of bed.

 

[RoseMontague]

There are some interesting questions about the positioning of Meredith's lamp however. Since this is the CT thread it may be a good place to bring them up. If you are interested, I'll post a few pics.

 

[Draca]

It is in the pictures. The position of the lamp looks like it is there so she can turn it on and off without getting out of bed.

Looking at photos I would say the lamp got knocked on the floor during the struggle by the bedside table.

 

[Draca]

There are some interesting questions about the positioning of Meredith's lamp however. Since this is the CT thread it may be a good place to bring them up. If you are interested, I'll post a few pics.

Let's hear it.

 

[RoseMontague]

Looking at photos I would say the lamp got knocked on the floor during the struggle by the bedside table.

Hmmmmmmmm. Let's take a look under the bed and see. You would think this lamp cord would have been close to the table then unless it was pulled out but it would still be in that direction. One also would assume it fell and landed like a cat, on it's base.



Here is another pic showing the lamp clearly. I wonder if it plugs in under the bed or over the bed? Where does all that other stuff get plugged in at? Is that a receptacle for a plug over the bed?

 

[RoseMontague]

This lamp does not have a very log cord. Can someone tell me if they think it plugs in over the bed. The next pictures will show the table just in the left view, no cords or anything else plugged in from the desk to the table.

The picture after shows the two lamps side by side, Meredith's does not have a very long cord at all.

 

[RoseMontague]

If Amanda's lamp got knocked down when the door was forced open, how did the base of the lamp end up under the bed?




How does Amanda lamp get plugged in and where?

 

[LondonJohn]

If Amanda's lamp got knocked down when the door was forced open, how did the base of the lamp end up under the bed?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_383964da6119b0b6db.jpg[/qimg]


How does Amanda lamp get plugged in and where?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/383964da6123336bf4.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/383964da6126764a88.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_383964da6128f7b6b1.jpg[/qimg]

It seems to me that Knox's lamp was originally on Meredith's desk, and was plugged into the wall socket near the door (on the desk side rather than the bed side). I think the lamp may have got knocked off the desk onto the floor in front of the door at some point in the struggle before Meredith's death, and that it was subsequently pushed back next to the bed when the door was opened (either when the assailant left, or when the door was broken open the next day). I think the lamp might well have still been plugged into the wall socket until the the door was broken open the next day, at which point the force of the dor opening might have pulled the plug out of the wall socket.

And I also think you're right about Meredith's bedside lamp. I think that the position of the chest and the length of the flex both suggest that Meredith placed the lamp on the floor next to the bed - in that way, she could read in bed and have a handy light in the night. To me, this also lends credence to the idea that Meredith borrowed Knox's lamp: She might not want to move her bedside lamp around in order to either work at her desk or apply makeup at her desk, and might have therefore decided to borrow Knox's (since Knox was apparently pretty much never at the cottage during the hours of darkness anyhow).

 

[RoseMontague]

I'm guessing what we see above the bed is the switches and the plug ins for the cords are directly below as in this picture. That would put the plug in below the level of the mattress (under the bed).

 

[RoseMontague]

It seems to me that Knox's lamp was originally on Meredith's desk, and was plugged into the wall socket near the door (on the desk side rather than the bed side). I think the lamp may have got knocked off the desk onto the floor in front of the door at some point in the struggle before Meredith's death, and that it was subsequently pushed back next to the bed when the door was opened (either when the assailant left, or when the door was broken open the next day). I think the lamp might well have still been plugged into the wall socket until the the door was broken open the next day, at which point the force of the dor opening might have pulled the plug out of the wall socket.

And I also think you're right about Meredith's bedside lamp. I think that the position of the chest and the length of the flex both suggest that Meredith placed the lamp on the floor next to the bed - in that way, she could read in bed and have a handy light in the night. To me, this also lends credence to the idea that Meredith borrowed Knox's lamp: She might not want to move her bedside lamp around in order to either work at her desk or apply makeup at her desk, and might have therefore decided to borrow Knox's (since Knox was apparently pretty much never at the cottage during the hours of darkness anyhow).

Excellent. I was going to bring up the mirror and the makeup next. Meredith's lamp would not reach from the sockett under the bed.

 

[RoseMontague]

OK,
Here is my "compromise conspiracy theory" (between LE brought the lamp in to see the crime scene better and Meredith borrowed the lamp for her Vamp costume/makeup).

Meredith did borrow the lamp and plugged it in next to the desk by the entry door and set it on the end of the table to do her makeup. She left it there.

LE wanted some more light to see by so they reached over and grabbed the lamp that was still plugged in, being careful not to go too far into the room as to step in the blood and disturb the scene. They also used it to examine the knife imprint on the bed and then set the lamp down out of the way behind the door at the foot of the bed where it was knocked down by some idiot LE person tripping over the cord and dragging the base under the bed. LOL.

ETA: This also explains why the people breaking down the door made no mention of the lamp at that time. I don't think the cops initially realized it was even Amanda's lamp.

 

[Amazer]

Excellent. I was going to bring up the mirror and the makeup next. Meredith's lamp would not reach from the sockett under the bed.

So did any of the room mates, or Amanda herself, testify that Meredith was in the habit of borrowing Amanda's lamp? It would seem to me that without any evidence towards establishing that habit you are engaging in a lot of baseless speculation.

 

[RoseMontague]

So did any of the room mates, or Amanda herself, testify that Meredith was in the habit of borrowing Amanda's lamp? It would seem to me that without any evidence towards establishing that habit you are engaging in a lot of baseless speculation.

Nope. Do you know how long it takes to develop a habit?

 

[LondonJohn]

Nope. Do you know how long it takes to develop a habit?

Yeah - they'd all shared a house for years, after all

I think people often forget what an incredibly compressed timeline is behind all this. The girls had only lived together for some six weeks before the murder. Even more pertinently, Knox and Sollecito had only first met some six days before the murder.

Given that Knox was apparently spending every night at Sollecito's after she met him, this is only five nights (discounting the night they met) for Knox to have established a pattern of being away from the cottage each night. It's therefore not unreasonable to suppose that Meredith would have noticed this pattern after a few days (i.e. 29-30 October), and might therefore have thought it was OK to borrow Knox's lamp on either the evening of the 30th or the 31st. It's even feasible that Meredith borrowed Knox's lamp on the night she was killed: we know she borrowed a textbook; she may have planned to read at her desk using Knox's lamp, and might have gone into Knox's room to borrow the lamp as soon as she got in (before being surprised by Guede once she and Knox's lamp were in her own room).

Of course, there's no reason at all why the other room mates would have known anything about Meredith borrowing Knox's lamp. Indeed, there's no real reason why Knox herself should have known, unless Meredith told her. If Knox was only visiting the cottage in the daytime to change clothes, shower and eat, then it's not unreasonable that she wouldn't have noticed her lamp was missing.