Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[CDHost]

The only reason I remember is the 'they chose evil'.

The key to this case is motivation. Normal people don't kill for no reason. Up until now, you and those supporting guilt have been able to get away with the speculation that Knox/Sollecito are not normal. That is the only way the motivations dreamt up could become plausible.

Great point and let me expanded upon it. Not only was the claim that they weren't normal but that they went well beyond the norms of people who were even exceedingly rare. For example there are a very small number of couples that engage in sexual homicides together. They have characteristics that Raffaele and Amanda did not possess. So even among this tiny minority, say 1:100,000,000 or so they were going to be a unique exception.

For example they wanted this sexual homicide to be female led, and as far as I can tell Elizabeth Báthory, from 500 years ago is the last female led couple with sexual homicides.

They also tend to have known each other for years and built up deep trust, unlike the week that Raffaele and Amanda knew each other. etc...

So not only were they abnormal but they supposedly didn't even fit the "norms" for the abnormal.

 

[Malkmus]

Much appreciated. How much does it cost to record an interrogation? The cost of a black DVD-R? That's what, 20 cents if you buy in bulk?

Does Italian law really allow a prosecutor to make all these statements to the press about an ongoing criminal case? Combined with the failure to sequester juries, that's a recipe for wrongful convictions in any high profile case. Very simple reforms would make the system much safer for the innocent without compromising the ability to convict the guilty. The first step is making an example of Mignini. His conduct has been, and continues to be, a disgrace to the legal profession.

Remember this explanation two years prior?

And why doesn’t a recording exist?

Mignini: The first time Amanda was heard as person informed of facts [a witness]. In these cases, because of the urgency, we never record. Then we suspended the interrogation as suspicion of crime emerges. I explained to Amanda that based on article 374 of the penal code - the one on spontaneous declarations - she would have been able to render a declaration [as a witness].

A lawyer should have been present only if I had asked her questions of complicity and/or accused her. But I didn’t asked a thing, practically I had only the function of a “notary public”.

You didn’t record it?

Mignini: No. I usually do when for example I am in my office. I recorded the declarations of her roommates and of the witnesses. But that night, we were at the police station, there was agitation, and we had to go and arrest Lumumba, who had just been accused by Amanda. Lumumba was later cleared thanks to me

And why do I find the last statement Lumumba was later cleared thanks to me so hilariously wrong?

 

[Poppy1016]

Could the prosecutors not have vetoed that? After all, such a stunt can easily backfire. People sometimes resent such blatant attempts to manipulate them, and I would think the prosecution would have the power to prevent Maresca from doing anything that they thought might damage their case. But the whole concept of the victim's family having a lawyer who presents evidence at a criminal trial is alien to me, and it seems like a terrible idea in general.

Yes I agree. Also, civil matters should be tried independently from criminal trials.

 

[Freddy]

Remember this explanation two years prior?

I did not remember. Thanks. That is also implausible, since she became a suspect on the first day they talked to her. A competent and non-corrupt investigator would have started recording as soon as the person being questioned became a suspect, even if that required suspending the interview to get it set up. You don't want to risk getting a confession and not having video. You could still get it in through police testimony, but video is much more powerful. Unless it reveals illegal coercive tactics...

 

[niktendo]

Why doesnt a recording exist?

Budget problems did not come into it. They had already discussed the tactics to be used in the interrogation. They specifically chose not to record it due to the methods they chose to employ. Why bother with all that complicated timewasting technical hassle like pressing record when you can make do with a signature. That provides all the authenticity and justification required, a squiggle of ink. The police were not surprised by any statements that came out during the interrogation, they were ecstatic that things had gone even better than planned. They didnt just charge in and start shouting, this was a slow drawn out affair. Begun with a slow pace, supportive, understanding. "Yes, yes thank you". "Very good". "What about this? Ah ok yes i see". "Can you tell me about this guy" etc... Then begin cranking up the pressure. Different people asking different questions...but repeating the same questions. "We need clarifications, what time this, what time that", keep moving the timeline forward and back, not in order, ask for more specifics. "This is really really important... did you do this first or that first" Clarify this time, that time, change subject, back again, then start playing each suspect against the other, first with little contradictions, then come the lies, the accusations. The conciliatory stance is replaced with outright hostility and intimidation, threats, evidence (real or made up). The isolation is heightened, the stress levels elevated, all building towards a crescendo if you like. Then the "help" (slap) to remember things correctly. For RS - "if you were sleeping how do you know she was there? isnt it possible she could have got up. OK so you agree its possible. So it must be possible she went out. But you said you didnt wake up, how could you know. See she did go out, we have evidence". meanwhile - "no no stupid girl thats not right, we know its not right we have evidence its not right and if you dont tell us you will go to prison". Ok ok we want to believe you but you are wrong, you have to help us so we can help you. Tell us how it happened. But we know it happened, we have proof. Why are you lying? Raff says you're lying. If you're not lying then why dont you help us to understand. Ah ok now we're getting somewhere. I know its difficult and you're tired but this is important. How could this have happened then? Try and imagine it, think about how it could have happened. No no not like that... try and picture in your mind, try imagining this. isnt this possible? But what about that? What about this? You have to agree this is possible, imagine it like this. Yes now you have the right idea, this is good, this is right, keep imagining and keep talking. This confirms what we already know, yes this is right, not what was said before. But didnt you notice this. Didnt you hear the scream. Oh so she was screaming? etc...

Of course there is no evidence any of this happened, its just my crazy ramblings at way past bed time.

 

[Malkmus]

I did not remember. Thanks. That is also implausible, since she became a suspect on the first day they talked to her. A competent and non-corrupt investigator would have started recording as soon as the person being questioned became a suspect, even if that required suspending the interview to get it set up. You don't want to risk getting a confession and not having video. You could still get it in through police testimony, but video is much more powerful. Unless it reveals illegal coercive tactics...

Of course. It was taped, I'm sure.

The fact alone that he changed his story means it's all bs anyway.

 

[Freddy]

Why doesnt a recording exist?

Budget problems did not come into it. They had already discussed the tactics to be used in the interrogation. They specifically chose not to record it due to the methods they chose to employ.

This seems to be the simplest explanation. Hopefully the lack of video with no plausible innocent excuse gets the defamation conviction overturned. There is no evidence that Knox signed the statement implicating Lumumba voluntarily. The only evidence is the statement itself (which can't speak to coercion or lack thereof) and the assurances of the authorities that it was voluntary. Given what is known about the interrogation and the fact that the proffered explanations for not taping are transparent lies, I don't think a court will trust the word of the prosecution. I don't see how that conviction can hold up.

 

[niktendo]

Mignini: The first time Amanda was heard as person informed of facts [a witness]. In these cases, because of the urgency, we never record

Then a few sentences later....

I recorded the declarations of her roommates and of the witnesses

 

[Freddy]

Then a few sentences later....

One of many demonstrable lies he has told, both to the press and in court. If this guy doesn't go to prison Italy's justice system will be forever tarnished.

 

[niktendo]

One of many demonstrable lies he has told, both to the press and in court. If this guy doesn't go to prison Italy's justice system will be forever tarnished.

I think politics is a more likely destination!

 

[moodstream]

To be fair, he also cited a lot of other evidence that has since been completely discredited.

Evidence, yes..... but I have grown a little hazy on the explanation of the motivation.

The only one I remember comes from p. 367 of the PMF translation (emphasis added).

Amanda + Raffaele chose evil, because they smoked pot, liked to watch movies, and read comic books.


Why, then, two young people, strongly interested in each other, with intellectual and cultural curiosity, he on the eve of his graduation and she full of interests, resolved to participate in an action aimed at forcing the will of Meredith, with whom they had, especially Amanda, a relationship of regular meetings and cordiality, to the point of causing her death, falls within the continual exercise of choice among [the range of] possibilities, and this Court can only register the **choice of extreme evil ** which was put into practice. It can be hypothesised that this **choice of evil** began with the [393] consumption of drugs which had happened also that evening, as Amanda testified.

On the effects of drugs of the type used by Amanda and by Raffaele, such as hashish and marijuana , [we] heard the testimony of Professor Taglialatela who, while underlining the great subjective variability (page 211, hearing of 17 July 2009) specified that the use of such substances has a negative influence on the cognitive capacity and causes alterations of perception (pages 201 and 207) and of the capacity to comprehend a situation (page 218). In his turn, Professor Cingolani, who together with Professor Umani Ronchi and Professor Aprile, had also dealt with the toxicological aspect (see witness report lodged on 15 April 2008, pages 26 and following), responding to the question he had been asked as to whether the use of drugs lowers inhibitions replied: "That is beyond doubt" (page 163 hearing of 19 September 2009), while correlating that effect to the habits of the person [on] taking the drugs. Raffaele Sollecito's friends had furthermore stated that such substances had an effect of relaxation and stupor.

Therefore it may be deduced that, accustomed to the consumption of drugs and the effects of the latter, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito participated actively in Rudy's criminal acts aimed at overcoming Meredith's resistance, subjugating her will and thus allowing Rudy to act out his lustful impulses; and this is considered to have happened because, for those [i.e. for people] who did not disdain the use of drugs (Amanda has stated that on that evening, before "making love", they had consumed drugs), watching films and reading comic books in which sexuality is accompanied by violence and by situations of fear, disregarding the concept of sexuality as an encounter of [two] persons moved by reciprocal and free emotion (see the comic books seized from Raffaele Sollecito and the statements on the viewing of films which had drawn the attention of the tutors of the ONAOSI College attended by Raffaele Sollecito), the prospect of helping Rudy in [his] goal of subduing Meredith in order to sexually abuse her may have seemed to be an exciting stimulant which, although unexpected, had to be tried. [394]

A motive, therefore, of an erotic, sexually violent nature which, arising from **the choice of evil** made by Rudy, found active collaboration from Amanda Knox andRaffaele Sollecito.

 

[Draca]

He perfectly knows that the Procura and the scientific police spent millions to collect the evidence and push forward the trial. He alone takes responsability for the verdict. It's difficult to put this together with a "no evidence" view.

Machieavelli,

In the millions spent to collect evidence, how much more would it have cost for the forensic team to pick up off of the floor the clothes torn off of Meredith Kercher by her killer? Is it really that difficult to stoop over and pick up clothes and put them in the right type of collection bag? How much do you think that action would have cost? Was it too expensive to stoop and pick up the clothes in November? Is that perhaps why they waited for December?

If millions were spent it was NOT on the investigation into the murder of Meredith Kercher, but were instead on wiretapping the families and friends of Amanda and Raffaele.


Evidence Uncollected by Forensic Police
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/09/video_shows_amanda_knox_invest.php

http://www.groundreport.com/World/Amanda-Knox-Evidence-Uncollected-by-Forensic-Polic/2941556

http://www.examiner.com/internation...out-evidence-not-collected-by-forensic-police


Why don't you be honest about this Machieavelli, they were not just incompetent. They were negligent. They failed to perform their simplest basic duties. They treated Meredith Kercher and her family with horrendous disregard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYJiZq3TQh0

 

[Freddy]

Evidence, yes..... but I have grown a little hazy on the explanation of the motivation.

The only one I remember comes from p. 367 of the PMF translation (emphasis added).

Amanda + Raffaele chose evil, because they smoked pot, liked to watch movies, and read comic books.


Why, then, two young people, strongly interested in each other, with intellectual and cultural curiosity, he on the eve of his graduation and she full of interests, resolved to participate in an action aimed at forcing the will of Meredith, with whom they had, especially Amanda, a relationship of regular meetings and cordiality, to the point of causing her death, falls within the continual exercise of choice among [the range of] possibilities, and this Court can only register the **choice of extreme evil ** which was put into practice. It can be hypothesised that this **choice of evil** began with the [393] consumption of drugs which had happened also that evening, as Amanda testified.

On the effects of drugs of the type used by Amanda and by Raffaele, such as hashish and marijuana , [we] heard the testimony of Professor Taglialatela who, while underlining the great subjective variability (page 211, hearing of 17 July 2009) specified that the use of such substances has a negative influence on the cognitive capacity and causes alterations of perception (pages 201 and 207) and of the capacity to comprehend a situation (page 218). In his turn, Professor Cingolani, who together with Professor Umani Ronchi and Professor Aprile, had also dealt with the toxicological aspect (see witness report lodged on 15 April 2008, pages 26 and following), responding to the question he had been asked as to whether the use of drugs lowers inhibitions replied: "That is beyond doubt" (page 163 hearing of 19 September 2009), while correlating that effect to the habits of the person [on] taking the drugs. Raffaele Sollecito's friends had furthermore stated that such substances had an effect of relaxation and stupor.

Therefore it may be deduced that, accustomed to the consumption of drugs and the effects of the latter, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito participated actively in Rudy's criminal acts aimed at overcoming Meredith's resistance, subjugating her will and thus allowing Rudy to act out his lustful impulses; and this is considered to have happened because, for those [i.e. for people] who did not disdain the use of drugs (Amanda has stated that on that evening, before "making love", they had consumed drugs), watching films and reading comic books in which sexuality is accompanied by violence and by situations of fear, disregarding the concept of sexuality as an encounter of [two] persons moved by reciprocal and free emotion (see the comic books seized from Raffaele Sollecito and the statements on the viewing of films which had drawn the attention of the tutors of the ONAOSI College attended by Raffaele Sollecito), the prospect of helping Rudy in [his] goal of subduing Meredith in order to sexually abuse her may have seemed to be an exciting stimulant which, although unexpected, had to be tried. [394]

A motive, therefore, of an erotic, sexually violent nature which, arising from **the choice of evil** made by Rudy, found active collaboration from Amanda Knox andRaffaele Sollecito.

Don't forget, she also had a vibrator and some condoms. She smoked pot and likes sex. Very unusual for a college student. This was obviously a drug-fueled orgy gone wrong.

 

[curi0us]

A little masonic sect CT recap:

Originally Posted by RWVBWL
What would make a court set both Raffaele and Amanda free, in your own opinion?

In case of judicial corruption, one of these two forces is required to play: money or massonry.

Surely you are not advocating a... <dramatic music> conspiracy theory?

(How am I the first to raise this issue? Don't we have a corps of ever-alert and completely even-handed posters here who are definitely not guilters and who will pull people up without fear or favour if they argue for a <dramatic music> conspiracy theory? I guess they were all asleep).

Must be a very big conspiracy too since it also supposedly influenced Mignini's own trial where he was found guilty of abuse of office:

The point 1) is very serious. Yes I am suggesting Mignini was not given a fair trial. The issue is serious, but the Italian system had also more serious issues than this one.

Some older JREF thread quotes from Machiavelli:

He is obviously at flight risk. He is exactly in the same situation as Ludwig, an Italian serial killer. Anyone who risks a very high penalty and has not confessed is considered at flight rist. In addition Sollecito is surrounded by a family who acitively conspired with illicit means against the investigation, he has a lot of money, is the son of a masonic leader in South Italy with capability of move a network at his disposal, and posseses firearms as well as the custom of walking around with weapons.

But Telenorba executives are also indicted. It's not normal for a tv network to comply and publish this material, to produce and to broadcast news reports like they did. It is not normal for a man in Bari to speak on the phone asking for governemtal powers to "flay" the chief of Perugia Flying squad. It is not comon for an average citizen to have a pillar of Bari masonry prof. Introna and Giulia Bongiorno on his payroll.

The Monster of Florence is a story of satanic cults and ritual murders.

And the story of satanic cults and ritual murders is instead of ganuinely Florentine origin, was already renown since many years before Mignini was appointed in the Narducci case.A group devoted to satanic cults and ritual murders actualy existed. The question is, whether Narducci was part of it or not. Whether people were involved in a policical covering of investigations, or not.

Mignini on the sect inspired Halloween linked ritual slaying of Meredith:

Mignini told the court: "There was a sect-like aspect with cultural connections to Halloween and All Saints Day playing a part. The killing actually happened the next day. Japanese comics found in Raffaele Sollecito's possession had pictures of murdered female vampires which were eerily similar to the scene of the crime."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20081026/ai_n30949025/
(The japanese comic was a mainstream graphic novel part of series that included two movies, three video games and three young adult books.)

Mignini on when the conspiracy against him started:

Just before the final summing up in the Knox appeal began, Mignini discussed his handling of an older case, the "Monster of Florence" serial killer, and his belief that his investigation of the 1985 death of a freemason,Francesco Narducci, that he linked to the case was mysteriously blocked.

"I have felt under attack ever since I investigated Narducci," he told the Guardian. "It all started there."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/03/giuliano-mignini-knox-prosecutor-conspiracy

Mignini in 2008 in court against AK and RS talks more about the conspiracy against him:

"They have attacked in an undignified manner, with total lack of arguments, and striking superficiality this Country's judicial system, the only one having jurisdiction on this matter. Amanda in listening, motionless. Even when Mignini says that "Nodoby in Italy would have done so much as denigrate and attack in such a shameless manner USA prosecutors. Moreover, Mignini says " no Italian journalist, nobody working in the judicial field would even dream to libel and slander an American prosecutor investigating an Italian suspect".

As if the message isn't clear enough, Mignini adds: " I am bewildered and shocked by this behavior. It is the first time-and I don't think it will even happen again- that I face such arrogance and superficiality. A minimum of experience and prudence should prevent these sketchy judgments, expressed from 9000 km distance. And all of this without even spending a word on the fact that the writs have been confirmed by the Tribunal of Riesame and the First Penal Section of the Supreme Court". According to Mignini, however, "the masterminds of these operations are in Italy".
(Translated by pmf nicki, posted there with pride.)

Note at the time Mignini's prosecution had already leaked at least a half dozen false stories to the press yet when he is criticized for that he sees it as evidence of a conspiracy against him.

 

[Ammonitida]

Of course. It was taped, I'm sure.

The fact alone that he changed his story means it's all bs anyway.

I don't see a way to reconcile the two conflicting statements he gave for why he did not record. That makes him a liar and a criminal for covering up the abuse perpetrated on Amanda during her interrogation. You damn right I would believe Amanda over him. He's a lying snake and needs to be brought to justice.

 

[Malkmus]

I don't see a way to reconcile the two conflicting statements he gave for why he did not record.

I don't think there is any way to. Although I'd like to hear the guilter take on it.

That makes him a liar and a criminal for covering up the abuse perpetrated on Amanda during her interrogation. You damn right I would believe Amanda over him. He's a lying snake and needs to be brought to justice.

I don't think things will go very smooth for him from here on. Whether it's with the real police or the karma police.

Personally, as I said, I think they did record it. Someone up-thread made a good observation and inferred that the police were most likely watching Amanda at all times, saw her meeting with Patrick that day where he asked her if she talked to any press and she quit working for him, and assumed right there that she and he were in cahoots. Of course their instincts were wrong, but I don't think they realized that until much later. But, with their "evidence" (the meeting with Patrick during the day and the text they took to mean a meeting the night of the murder, blurry CCTV image) in hand, I bet they did record it like they did everything else. Only, things didn't go as planned and they had to resort to less than ethical tactics, and got rid of the tape. My theory.

 

[Draca]

This is what I wrote over at injusticeinperugia.org:

Raffaele's sister spoke. A very dignified woman - spoke of how Raffaele taught them all a lesson in integrity - how Raffaele never abandoned Amanda, how he preferred to be unjustly condemned to a life sentence than try to extricate himself from Amanda's situation. I totally agree with Raffaele's aunt!

Raffaele's father spoke also, at length. Also a very dignified man. He criticised the prosecution. He told viewers how disgusted he was that the interrogation of his son was not recorded, with the excuse of lack of funds given by the PM - he reiterated this point several times. Good on him!

The priest at Amanda's prison spoke. He was fighting back the tears. He
clearly knew Amanda to be innocent, and a very nice person.

I can't find your post on IIP, so many threads going on over there. This is really a beautiful thing. I agree completely. Raffaele is an amazing person. His thoughts and tenderness toward Amanda was touching. His father wrote that he still like likes her. He could indeed have thrown her under the bus and gotten out of there. A simple agreement with the prosecutors to say he thinks she did leave would have done it. It wouldn't matter if he changed his story. Rudy Guede did afterall. His is admirable, honorable and tougher than he probably knew. He's a real catch for some lucky gal. When he gave his statement and talked about his 'Free Amanda and Raffaele' bracelet I was thinking - You really think this romantic killed Meredith Kercher?

I would love to read more. Do you have any links to this?

 

[Teddy2007]

The female judge on Porta a porta and the host of the show apparently argue that it is: http://www.rai.tv/dl/RaiTV/programmi/media/ContentItem-5b19958e-38c2-4728-bd65-8bf4cf9a1dcf.html

I don't know what they're saying, but maybe Machiavelli can help us out.

That female judge is a disgusting excuse for an ex-prosecutor. What did she just say in that episode? First, she accused the Knox family of having spent all their time in a 5 star hotel, which another guest demonstrated was wrong. She tried to make disingenuous comparisons between Meredith's family and Knox's family. Before that she said "remaining in prison we have the poor negro". OK, she did say that she believes in the honesty of this court of appeal, but she has to bite her lip as she says it. I want to vomit every time I see her speak, and she is a demonstration of everything that is wrong with the face-saving campaign that is going on in Italy right now. I wouldn't take any of her words seriously.

 

[Mary_H]

Didn't you know? Because of budget cuts, they didn't record the interrogations. That's right, they had money to bring in a bunch of detectives from Rome so that they could stay fresh while tag teaming Knox and wearing her down to the point of exhaustion in an all-night interrogation worthy of the Inquisition, but they didn't have the money to record an interrogation of their prime suspect in the biggest and highest profile murder case in the history of the town. Anyone buy that?

The funny thing is, Freddy, I will even accept Amanda's coerced, Italian statements of the 6th as documentation in a debate about the alleged lies. It's the days before the interrogation that are inscrutable. Yet Machiavelli and other guilters have repeatedly stated that Amanda became a suspect because she had shown herself to be a liar, regardless of the fact that there has never been one ounce of evidence supporting that claim.

I should win the James Randi million on this one: I predict that Machiavelli will not answer my question.

 

[DarkStar2011]

Agreed. Extradition would have to go through people high up in both governments. Despite the existence of the treaty, the evidence is so clearly lacking that I just don't see extradition even being requested, regardless of what the high court says. At any rate, the chances of any fair proceeding resulting in reinstatement of the conviction are zero. Given the expert testimony on appeal, this case is over.

I'd say "very slim," but not zero. I find Mignini's previously-stated grounds for appeal (that the DNA review should not have been allowed, since the time period to request it had lapsed) to be laughable, considering that the defense requested a review at the first trial. However, I think there's a slight possibility that the Court of Cassation might rule that Hellmann erred in not granting the prosecution's motion for yet another review of the evidence to "break the tie" between the original lab and C-Y. Once again, I don't think it very likely, since the C-Y investigation was an independent one commissioned by the court of appeals rather than a partisan one from the defense, but let's be frank -- after Bush v. Gore, nothing a Supreme Court (of any country) might do could surprise me. It shouldn't have any effect on Knox, since she's long gone from Italy, but I'm thinking that Sollecito's father may want to send his son -- and maybe some of his bank balances -- to some other country with no extradition treaties with Italy shortly before the C of C issues its final ruling...just as a "precaution." (I understand Grand Cayman is nice that time of year. )

The prosecutor should be worried about his own skin. The closing arguments at the appeal were an absolute disgrace to the legal profession. I was aghast that a closing argument consisting of nothing but character assassination and innuendo would even be allowed. They didn't even try to appeal to evidence. Just emotion and that Knox is a she-devil witch.

Showing the gory pictures of Meredith's dead body was particularly classy. Talk about insulting the victim and her family. It was also completely irrelevant to the guilt or innocence of the accused, and a naked attempt to be as inflammatory as possible to get the jury to ignore the complete lack of evidence. An American prosecutor who pulled that crap would have been cut off and found in contempt after about 20 seconds.

I share your opinion, but I think we both have U.S. courts in mind. While I will be the last to claim the U.S. justice system is faultless, there are at least standards for what is allowed in summations (nothing but what you have already established by evidence) that would have meant the prosecution in this case would have only been able to argue for a half-hour at most, instead of the three days they had this time. Plus, the separation of verdict and sentencing processes in the U.S. means that prosecutors really aren't allowed to bring issues of a defendant's alleged character before the court while it is still debating guilt or innocence. But the U.S. system is not the system of Italy, and it seems as if these sorts of final arguments may be more commonplace and accepted there than those familiar with U.S. courts would imagine.