Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

It just occurred to me that Rudy had a reason to stage a break in for every scenario that does not involve a real break in.

He left his DNA inside Meredith! I repeat. He left his DNA inside Meredith!

If he realized or even suspected he left DNA inside Meredith but thought or hoped he had not left any other identifiable evidence of himself he would have a rock solid reason to stage a break in!

So a quick wipe down with a towel to remove any obvious visible traces of himself that he saw, quickly stage a break in, and away he goes.

And since he was acquainted with Meredith he could invent a story such as: 'I had a date with Meredith, we messed around, I left, everything was fine when I left'. And then he goes dancing to demonstrate that it was just a normal night for him. Later he goes to Germany to watch developments so he can adjust his story as required.

About the only scenario where Rudy does not benefit from a staged break in is the one where he actually does break in. But ironically even that benefited him because the prosecution fixated on a staged break in with the belief it would solely implicate Raffaele and Amanda.

You're absolutely right. You've articulated something I wrote about earlier today, only you did it far more concisely and eloquently than me

And yes, the bitter irony of the situation is that even a real break-in by Guede (the most likely scenario) helped Guede when the tunnel vision of police and prosecutors led them to falsely conclude that 1) the break-in was staged, and 2) the only person with a motive to stage a break-in was Knox (and, by extension, Sollecito).

 

[JREF2010]

He claims he believes his sources and so far they were not wrong. They gave him "detailed information" about the verdict in the first trial and the outcome of the C&V report. Sadly, he never shared this info on the main thread with anyone, so no one knows if he actually knew anything.

Now, he claims, he was informed that Knox and Sollecito won't be freed and they will receive reduced sentences.

So I wasnt aware his informants are saying reduced sentence's.

I noticed Candace and Doug Preston also are on video stating reduced sentences years ago, maybe they have inside sources too?

But as I posted the latter was stated before the Hellman and C&V were inserted into the Perugia courthouse. Others say reduced sentence.

I find this reduced sentence issue interesting, seems either your guilty or not?

Reduced sentence:
someone who is kind of maybe possibly guilty or innocent, but young and seemed nice in the Daily Mail picture, and the Curatolo guy was funny and laughed out of court, but what he said who knows? He was on heroin after all.

To me, Massei's verdict was based off the science of Ink Blots.

 

[JREF2010]

I wonder if it was one of those scenes like in a cartoon, where they said to a room of prosecutors, "OK, who wants to volunteer to take over the Knox case for the appeal". And there were a bunch of sounds like a small jet taking off, and a some small puffs of smoke, and no one was left in the room, except for Mignini and Comodi. And this other guy was in the bathroom, so he got stuck with it.

haha...he was in the bathroom. It could be that simple.

Seriously though, what prosecutor could understand Mignini's 11:40pm murder scene based off some little old lady that didnt see anything because there were plants in here window.

I would like to see the prosecutions main cards they lay down, if one is the Mixed Traces as the "new holy grail" of their ever changing evidence pile, Hellman could have C&V review it and postpone the verdict a couple weeks.

But still the knife fails, the bra clasp is made confusing with too many-peaks on the chart.

DNA of the mixed traces? Is it another sample like the bra clasp, where Stefanoni picked and chose peaks?

And still did it come from Rudys bloody shoe prints? He did say he went to Filomenas window to see the infamous silhouette.
So logically Rudy could have tracked it into Filomenas room, and his DNA would not be present form his tennis shoe.

 

[billyryan]

Good question. The actual lead prosecutor, Giancarlo Costagliola, has seemingly had an extremely low profile - not only outside the courtroom, but also inside the courtroom. It's highly likely that he will conduct the vast majority of closing arguments for the prosecution, but it's a bit of a mystery why he has allowed Comodi and Mignini to take centre stage in and out of the courtroom up to now.

If I were to hazard a guess, I would guess that Costagliola is bright enough to see what's going on here. I would guess that he can see that Mignini and Comodi presided over a totally botched investigation, and that it was only because they managed to pull the wool over the eyes of a compliant, credulous Massei in the first trial that Knox and Sollecito were found guilty in the first trial. I am guessing that Costagliola might have decided to keep his own hands as clean as possible in this debacle. And I'm therefore guessing that this is why he was probably happy for Mignini to inject himself (unusually and improperly) into the appeal trial, and for Mignini/Comodi to be at the forefront of the prosecution case to date in the appeal.

What would be incredibly telling would be if Costagliola delegated large chunks of the prosecution closing arguments to Comodi and/or Mignini. I think this would be proof positive of my theory. But even if Costagliola does lead the closing argument, that's not necessarily an indication that he feels comfortable doing so.

As for the constant extra-courtroom media utterances by Comodi and Mignini, I think that both of them are becoming increasingly desperate to protect their reputations. I think that they are now both loose cannons, who are circumventing the control of the Prosecutors' Office to advance their own personal agendas. I think that Mignini is at least wise enough to know that his career in the law is about to end, and I strongly suspect that Comodi's recent extraordinary alleged comments (reported by Nick Pisa) about court bias will - if accurate - condemn her to severe professional censure. As I've said before, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Comodi doesn't turn up in court at the time of closing arguments, although the Prosecutors' Office might prefer not to disrupt the trial by removing her from the case at this stage. Either way, I think it's very likely that Comodi will be under investigation for these remarks, whether that investigation happens immediately or after the acquittals.


PS: When it's my birthday, I think I shall resort to announcing this fact pointedly here on the thread, in order to solicit the "Happy Birthday" messages that I crave. I'm quite lonely and insecure, you see

Giancarlo Costigliola as the head prosecutor would it be possible that he would now in the closing arguments phase assert his authority and look for an acquittal on the grounds of lack of proof,I have read he wants to become a judge in the supreme court,like you LJ I believe he has worked out that Mignini and Comodi presided over the persecution of two innocent defendants and all of his actions to date are to protect his reputation from whatever fallout their may be from this case
Costigliola must know that Hellmann is going to acquit and to just continue as he has to date is just to act as pontius pilot did and wash his hands of the whole affair,he knows the prosecutors have no case he sees the world press in court everyday this Salem witch trial is in session,he has the right to look for an acquittal in closing arguments to do so would be betrayel in Mignini's and Comodi's eyes but it would also show him as a man more interested in justice than victory

 

[tsig]

What annoys me about a lot of this, as with other blatant miscarriages of justice, is all the spinning of peripheral irrelevancies as prima facie evidence of guilt. Every confused contradiction, even instances of behaviour which aren't quite in line with how the poster thinks he or she would have reacted to the same circumstances, are paraded as reasons for a guilty verdict.

If there were objective physical evidence implicating Knox and/or Sollecito in the murder, then these issues could add to the picture. But with absolutely nothing reliable to place either of them in the same room as the murder, ditzy behaviour on its own is evidence of nothing but ditzy behaviour.

By the way, not to import this in here, but do have a look at this exchange.

http://perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?style=1&f=1&t=324&start=11000#p87210

Words fail me.

Rolfe.

You mean this:

Now, why do people lie? To avoid taking responsibility for their actions. I believe Amanda lies, because the truth is worse than any lie she can come up with.

 

[Rolfe]

You mean this:

Now, why do people lie? To avoid taking responsibility for their actions. I believe Amanda lies, because the truth is worse than any lie she can come up with.

No, I mean the love-in between capealadin and Jackie.

J: I love to see you work those disingenuous bastards into a frenzy. How do you do it?! You NEVER resort to their underhanded tactics! It's beautiful! There's just something about you. It's as though they NEED your approval.

C: I come from a place, inside me, that cries out for justice. .. There is a certainty, for me, that the right people are in prison. An absolute certainty.

It's just so refreshing to see such incisive assessment of the evidence and the issues in the case, all conducted with a dispassionately open mind.... not. Worth bearing in mind when capealadin comes back to post here.

Kinda funny, with reference to this.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?style=1&f=1&t=402&start=5000#p98761

Catnip: Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so.

This last, of course, completely lacking the power the giftie gie us, and assuming that those believing in innocence are A certain and B wrong.

Rolfe.

 

[Antony]

As for the constant extra-courtroom media utterances by Comodi and Mignini, I think that both of them are becoming increasingly desperate to protect their reputations. I think that they are now both loose cannons, who are circumventing the control of the Prosecutors' Office to advance their own personal agendas. I think that Mignini is at least wise enough to know that his career in the law is about to end, and I strongly suspect that Comodi's recent extraordinary alleged comments (reported by Nick Pisa) about court bias will - if accurate - condemn her to severe professional censure. As I've said before, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Comodi doesn't turn up in court at the time of closing arguments, although the Prosecutors' Office might prefer not to disrupt the trial by removing her from the case at this stage. Either way, I think it's very likely that Comodi will be under investigation for these remarks, whether that investigation happens immediately or after the acquittals.

Don't forget Comodi's barely-veiled threat - wasn't this against one of the court experts? "Don't insinuate something you'll regret later ..."

 

[LondonJohn]

I see that there is excitement elsewhere that the ToD argument with respect to stomach/intestine contents may be susceptible to considerable skewing owing to Meredith's hangover. However, this is simply not true in this case. Meredith by all accounts had a substantial amount of alcohol the night before her murder. However, she was home by around 4am, and it can be assumed that she probably had her last alcoholic drink by 3.00-3.30am. We know from Meredith's English friends that Meredith did not drink any alcohol when she was at their house. In addition, blood tests carried out at autopsy showed a level of blood alcohol equivalent to a small glass of wine in Meredith's system at the time of her death.

So Meredith had very little alcohol in her system at the time she ate the pizza meal at around 6.00-6.30pm. It's true that there are various studies which demonstrate that large amounts of alcohol ingestion can retard gastric emptying, but these same studies show that small amounts of alcohol ingestion have no effect on gastric transit. Furthermore, it's believed that the primary reason for any retardation is the direct action of alcohol upon the lining of the stomach. Therefore it's likely that any delay in emptying is only relevant if there is actually alcohol in the stomach at the time of food ingestion.

The physiological mechanisms behind a hangover (which is actually a combination of an acute short-term withdrawal from alcohol plus dehydration) are well-known by now. The effects of a hangover are almost exclusively related to brain chemistry, blood glucose levels and liver function. The feeling of nausea and loss of appetite that can be associated with a hangover are usually the results of the residual effects of alcohol on the stomach lining. But the stomach is an incredibly robust organ that has evolved to deal with all manner of unpleasant and toxic food/drink ingesta (alcohol is, amongst many other things, quite a potent toxin). In an otherwise healthy person, the stomach lining usually repairs itself after such an attack within 5-6 hours maximum of any irritation caused by alcohol. That's why most people have experienced the sensation of feeling really nauseous in the middle of the night after a big night out, or first thing the following morning, but by late morning they are craving a fry-up or something similar.

And since we know with reasonable certainty that Meredith ended her heavy consumption of alcohol at around 3.00-3.30am on the 1st, her stomach lining would absolutely certainly have repaired itself and calmed any irritation by the time she ate her pizza meal at 6.00-6.30pm that evening - some 15 hours later. Therefore, it's possible to assert with very high probability that any alcohol ingestion from the previous night - even if very heavy - would not have affected Meredith's gastric motility by 6.00-6.30pm the following evening.

 

[Grinder]

Meredith and the other girls were so drunk that digestion was impacted 12 hours later. Once again when it is convenient for the PGP to have them partying they are partying, when it's convenient to say they are serious and not like the dreaded Amanda that's how they are.

Well if they were that drunk, then I doubt they could remember whether Rudy was around or not. Please it doesn't matter but the point is that these girl's testimony about that night of clubbing is taken as gospel by the PGP.

The stomach contents is just another piece of evidence that Meredith was murdered well before 11:30 and most certainly by 10. Everything except Nara point to the earlier death.

 

[Grinder]

One moderator is so incensed with Shay for covering the case and not a couple of other cases taking place in West Seattle that she is beside herself.

If those local cases are of such great interest to her and her neighbors, why has she spent almost 4 years on Meredith's murder and only posts on her own site (and maybe WS Herald complaining about Shay) about these cases?

 

[GreyFox]

@Fuji,
I dont see how attacking Bruce supports the guilters case at all? If you were to expose him for something what good would it do? Do you think it would kill the movement to expose the corrupt case put against these two? I think not. Besides it's not like he's presenting himself as a doctor or something.

 

[js202]

No, I mean the love-in between capealadin and Jackie.

J: I love to see you work those disingenuous bastards into a frenzy. How do you do it?! You NEVER resort to their underhanded tactics! It's beautiful! There's just something about you. It's as though they NEED your approval.

C: I come from a place, inside me, that cries out for justice. .. There is a certainty, for me, that the right people are in prison. An absolute certainty.

It's just so refreshing to see such incisive assessment of the evidence and the issues in the case, all conducted with a dispassionately open mind.... not. Worth bearing in mind when capealadin comes back to post here.

Kinda funny, with reference to this.

<snip>
Catnip: Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so.

This last, of course, completely lacking the power the giftie gie us, and assuming that those believing in innocence are A certain and B wrong.

Rolfe.

Now if only the two of them together could formulate one coherent thought, they would truly be dangerous.

 

[Grinder]

@Fuji,
I dont see how attacking Bruce supports the guilters case at all? If you were to expose him for something what good would it do? Do you think it would kill the movement to expose the corrupt case put against these two? I think not. Besides it's not like he's presenting himself as a doctor or something.

It helps them by diverting the conversation. Of course, nothing on these boards will alter the outcome.

 

[theRealBob]

Mignini claims he is "satisfied" with the disputed forensic work, finds the triumphalism of the Knox camp "questionable", and also has a new legal argument up his sleeve. "The legal code states that any review of evidence must be requested immediately, not two years later." If the couple are acquitted, he added, the verdict could yet be annulled if Italy's high court decides the recent DNA review was illegal.

"[/B]

I do find this to be slightly worrying and is exactly the type of legal loophole that lawyers exploit successfully in other high profile (big money) cases.

There are however two points about the DNA review.
It never got retested because one item had no DNA anyway and the other was conveniently destroyed by the lab. So they just went over the same old paperwork.

The reviews were called for at a far earlier date in an incredilbly slow moving legal process. The point in time that they were requested has been seen as valid in this trial process with no challenges to the legality of the request before. Also the request was made at an appropriate moment not long after questions were raised about the DNA results which were finally released in Perugian officials own time.
Something the defence had no say in.

 

[theRealBob]

I see Yummi has stated that the expert report should have been requested at the preliminary hearing when Stefanoni deposited her report. The problem as I see it is that the defense had no idea at the time how bad her report was, simply because the prosecution had not turned over what they needed to properly review the report. A lot of the really questionable stuff was not known until 30 July 2009, and the raw data was only obtained by the experts at the appeal trial.

Quite right.

The prosecution's DNA team didn't hand over the paperwork, and held it up as much as possible at every request from the defence.

In this case there needs to be some latitude applied if Mignini's legal loophole can be dragged up and applied.

 

[GreyFox]

Well it's hard to blame them. When they do try, all they have is " it was too cold to take a shower " . Though slightly different but the point being the same, most of us with kids know what it's like to take that dreaded cold shower.Especialy if you had sex the night before !

 

[Poppy1016]

G'day mate,
In your opinion, wouldn't Hellman know whether the independant review was legal or not?

 

[GreyFox]

Why would Hellman waste his time if it wasn't. Why have an appeal if you cant reveiw the evidence? I think Mignini is fishing on this one. Hellman is in a tough spot though. A reduced sentence of 12 years wouldn't completely surprise me. Allows the prosecution to gain credit (save face) for locking them up a little longer. Then allow the next appeal to set them free. I'm not sure he would want his country's legal system to have to start investigating so many corrupt people. I hope he's not fronting to be fair only to go down the middle with his decision. I hope i'm wrong but based on the first trial I have a hard time believing. Fingers crossed !

 

[JREF2010]

So Andrea Vogt's numbers posted

One Perugian attorney who did not want to be named gave a 70-30 percent chance of overturning versus upholding, while a criminology professor in Rome gave Knox 90% odds of acquittal or a reduced sentence.

According to Maffei, it is "perfectly possible" that the court could acquit.

Andrea didnt mention any odds in favor of the upheld conviction.
Her secret sources must be different than some others.

She mentions Patricks lawyer to say something too, odd isnt it?
Wonder what the odds are the interrogation/Calunnia case will get a full investigation?

 

[Mary_H]

Meredith and the other girls were so drunk that digestion was impacted 12 hours later. Once again when it is convenient for the PGP to have them partying they are partying, when it's convenient to say they are serious and not like the dreaded Amanda that's how they are.

Well if they were that drunk, then I doubt they could remember whether Rudy was around or not. Please it doesn't matter but the point is that these girl's testimony about that night of clubbing is taken as gospel by the PGP.

Excellent point, Grinder (and thanks to RWVBWL for the multi-quoting tutorial).

One moderator is so incensed with Shay for covering the case and not a couple of other cases taking place in West Seattle that she is beside herself.

If those local cases are of such great interest to her and her neighbors, why has she spent almost 4 years on Meredith's murder and only posts on her own site (and maybe WS Herald complaining about Shay) about these cases?

Good question, considering that Michael/Fulcanelli once explained that the reason PMF reps needed to observe the FOA fundraiser at Salty's was because PMF is part of the community of journalists/news media (who are covering the case).