Not about Halloween.
It is on Nov 17 in the jail.
So being stoned is not an excuse, either, this time.
November 17th? What happened then? I just checked his diary and there's no entry for that day, did you mean another source? I can't think of what it could be, except maybe that
Telenorbo 'interview' or whatever it was? I don't recall much from that germane to this issue, if that's what it was.
That on Nov 2 Raffaele gave the first account how they had passed the murder night.
And he did not mixed it up with Halloween.
So it is unlikely that 3 days later he did.
This I'm also unaware of, what source does this come from? Is this from the Postals as noted in
Matteini? Was he interviewed later that day?
At any rate this is the one where he was right but in the 10:40 statement of the fifth he 'recanted' to the day before, my guess being stoned and shoeless and maybe getting a little Masonic massage by the police he told them more or less what happened on the 31st: they split up at the town square and he went home around 9 PM and she returned at about 1 AM. We all know it didn't happen, it's close enough to what did happen on Halloween it seems a reasonable inference that's what happened.
They put the pressure on and since they didn't like the real answer he figured he might have it wrong and one that they thought was correct, a perfectly reasonable thing to do for a stoned college kid being told he was wrong by police who he figured must know better, and he guessed maybe he had it wrong because Amanda had said something about the (correct) night and he went along with it because he 'didn't think about the contradictions'--that didn't exist. Except of course the ones the cops put there. Angry policeman can really get their way sometimes when they insist they are right and the subject doesn't really know for sure and doesn't think it matters much.
After all Raffaele has no reason to think the cops were mistaken or that it was important, why would anyone suspect
them? They might have given him the same 'hard evidence' line of bull they'd be giving Amanda. What did you expect poor Raffaele to do, argue with them?
They asked Raffaele, he said that Amanda had gone from his flat for hours while he was constantly staying there.
What could they have got from him about his role in the murder?
He did not know about Patrick (nor about Rudy in my opinion).
Of course he didn't--but the cops didn't know that. Those nasty suspicious minds have just seen him recant his story for the murder--and incidentally leave himself alibi-less. They are investigating a rape-murder. They suspect Amanda, who is constantly cuddling with Raffaele and following him around like a frightened puppy. Monica Napoleoni will make a special point of berating Amanda for it when they're done with Raffaele. They've noticed, as Giobbi will tell Paul Ciolino--do you remember what he also said about studying their behavior together when he called them in?
Bolint, do you know the best way to tell if someone is lying in a situation like this? Look at the statement and see if it fits the circumstances and context. If the cops have just gotten him to admit he's 'lying' about his alibi in 25 easy minutes, and they have reason to believe Amanda is involved with a male, who do you suppose the number one suspect ought to be? The brand new boyfriend is a really good candidate, especially as they've been following them around calling them 'cretins' and such and tapping their phones.
Sooooo, here Raffaele is in this room all by himself while they go after Amanda about
someone else. Then they get Patrick's name and they just...fall under her spell and do what she wishes and become zombies? It doesn't even
occur to them she might be lying and trying to place the blame elsewhere, maybe away from cuddly-pie sitting shoeless in the next room? They aren't inherently suspicious of him
anyway?
People can be weird, but institutions have policies and procedures and my brother's eight year-old could figure this one out. This is pretty much as obvious a lie as can be told. It's pretty clear it was they who wanted Patrick, not Amanda, which incidentally is what her statements, note, and their bizarre reaction to them including triumphalist behavior making the arrests and parading through town will tell you. They are
lying about this--it was they who wanted Patrick, Amanda was run over just like Raffaele was.
Isn't it more fun finding real Bad Guys with real lies rather than confused kids who didn't get close enough to sniff Rudy's dump and were mistaken?
: