Continuation Part 4: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Kestrel]

Perhaps the most important press transgression was not proactive but rather myopic

The press never asked the police how they knew what was correct before.the Amanda statement of Nov. 5/6. Imagine they had pressed the chief and others to disclose the source of their knowledge of how the crime had occurred. Obviously, the police couldn't say that the information couldn't be released as they were releasing quotes from the interrogation and the notes Amanda provided. The police were giving the press all sorts of information.

Imagine that they had detailed their thinking on the text messages and the fact that Patrick's alibi started at 10:30 which they claimed wasn't good enough because they were convinced the murder had occurred earlier. Even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in while .

Much of what has been fleshed out by the PIP or PNGP people could have been written within days or weeks of the crime if the press had done its job.

The night of the interrogation should have been questioned as soon as the chief said case closed and indicated they had questioned her until "she buckled and told us what we knew to be correct."

If the press had shown how wrong the police were before they released Patrick, the entire "she accused an innocent black man" meme would have only been played on sites that still believe in the "bloody bathroom."

The public and most members of the press believe that guilt and lies are signaled by a suspect's behavior. They also believe that police are experts at determining guilt by observing behavior. Few are aware that science has proven otherwise. That even experts trained in the art do little better than chance at detecting lies.

What the public believes about human psychology is often conflicts with what science has proven.

 

[Didaktylos]

So 180,000 euro spent on a crappy video. Can we cut the "budget cut" crap now? Thanks.

It's plain as a pikestaff - the interrogations of AK & RS were recorded - but the authorities don't want the full story of what happened getting out. I don't know whether they have hidden or destroyed the official copies (though I'm sure that some junior officers have unofficial copies in safe places, just to make sure that their superiors stay honest).

 

[christianahannah]

Why do you think C&V's report was delayed last spring? Why were they complaining that they didn't have all the necessary data, if it had been released way back in 2009?

What is deemed necessary today (or in spring 2010) may not have been deemed necessary in the past (summer 2009) or even the law. Just as science evolves and is ever changing, so this too will occur with law (though at a slower pace).

I don't think there were deliberate lies told or obfuscation in this case. I think it is a matter of science moving quickly and the law trying to catch up.

 

[bookworm]

It's plain as a pikestaff - the interrogations of AK & RS were recorded - but the authorities don't want the full story of what happened getting out. I don't know whether they have hidden or destroyed the official copies (though I'm sure that some junior officers have unofficial copies in safe places, just to make sure that their superiors stay honest).

I wouldn't be surprised if these recordings were suddenly found for the calunnia trials - with alot of gaps in place.

 

[anglolawyer]

Here's a fascinating early report from Nov. 3, 2007:

A British student murdered in Italy may have invited the killer into her home, police investigating her death now believe.
Officers think Meredith Kercher, 21, left three flatmates to go home alone after watching a film on the night she was murdered because she had arranged to see a man she had met the previous night at a Hallowe'en party.

Police said last night there were indications that she had sex before she was stabbed in the neck. Her attacker locked the bedroom door before fleeing the house and dumping her two mobile phones in a nearby garden.

Pietro Campolongo, a fellow student at the university, said he had warned Meredith never to be at home alone.
"I knew Meredith and her friends. I know Meredith met someone on Hallowe'en and this guy persuaded her to stay in Perugia rather than go back to one of her friend's houses. We think it was he who persuaded her to open the door on Thursday. I warned her about this. I warned her a thousand times. Girls should never stay at home alone."

I doubt Rudy was reading this in the English language press. Once again, do the Italian readers know if the Italian press had the same story.

Other early stories also refer to Meredith as a party girl. The above story mentions regular bar attendance. It definitely is the case that as time went by those references no longer appeared in stories.

I would be fascinated as to how the PGP would explain the date she had planned part of the story. The story above is from the Telegraph not the Sun, btw.

Wonder what happened to Pietro Campolongi's evidence? It's pretty quick off the blocks this story. Did the police form this theory because of what he said or because they immediately judged the burglary to have been staged and inferred from the absence of signs of forced entry that she must have known the killer?

 

[smkovalinksy]

I am recanting on calunnia. I no longer agree with Hellman-Zanetti and Massei on Knox's conviction for calunnia towards Patrick Lumumba. That anyone cares what I believe is also a mystery!

Peter Quennell and Peggy Ganong have done a mountain of work supplying the world with an English translation of CNN's May 6, 2011, two hour interview with Mignini. Whereas Quennell and Ganong mean the two-hour transcript to prove that Magnini is a nice and thoughtful, honest guy - actually reading it gie (me) a totally different perception.

He's a bigger weasel than I'd thought. How Quennell and Ganong can read this and think he was simply a "transcriber of Amanda Knox's spontaneous declarations" pushes the limits of credulity, and makes me reach for words which will be banned by the JREF moderators.

See: http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...w With Mignini That CNN SHOULD Have Reflected

Along with this, I can no longer hold to Amanda Knox's conviction on calunnia, as I have until reading Magnini's OWN account of the 1:45-5:45 am interrogation. He says in effect that he only made transcripts of her free and spontaneous declarations, like a notary would.

No wonder the Italian Supreme Court ruled this illegal.... if you believe Mignini, as do Quennell and Ganong, I have a bridge in Manhattan I'd like to sell you.....

Now you must go announce this at IIP.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Here's a fascinating early report from Nov. 3, 2007:

A British student murdered in Italy may have invited the killer into her home, police investigating her death now believe.
Officers think Meredith Kercher, 21, left three flatmates to go home alone after watching a film on the night she was murdered because she had arranged to see a man she had met the previous night at a Hallowe'en party.

Police said last night there were indications that she had sex before she was stabbed in the neck. Her attacker locked the bedroom door before fleeing the house and dumping her two mobile phones in a nearby garden.

Pietro Campolongo, a fellow student at the university, said he had warned Meredith never to be at home alone.
"I knew Meredith and her friends. I know Meredith met someone on Hallowe'en and this guy persuaded her to stay in Perugia rather than go back to one of her friend's houses. We think it was he who persuaded her to open the door on Thursday. I warned her about this. I warned her a thousand times. Girls should never stay at home alone."

I doubt Rudy was reading this in the English language press. Once again, do the Italian readers know if the Italian press had the same story.

Other early stories also refer to Meredith as a party girl. The above story mentions regular bar attendance. It definitely is the case that as time went by those references no longer appeared in stories.

I would be fascinated as to how the PGP would explain the date she had planned part of the story. The story above is from the Telegraph not the Sun, btw.

I recall reading that story awhile back, and the realization of the subsequent transformation of the story, and the reasons for such a transformation, becoming chillingly clear.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

What is deemed necessary today (or in spring 2010) may not have been deemed necessary in the past (summer 2009) or even the law. Just as science evolves and is ever changing, so this too will occur with law (though at a slower pace).

I don't think there were deliberate lies told or obfuscation in this case. I think it is a matter of science moving quickly and the law trying to catch up.

I'm curious how you reached that conclusion. What specific scientific advances would lead an expert to request more data in 2010 than they would have requested in 2009? Where did you get this idea?

Also, have you read the English translation of C&V's report? I would encourage you to look at this section in particular:

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/...egarding-item-36-knife/quantification-of-dna/

Here is an excerpt:

...what is reported on page 78 of the RTIGF (and confirmed in the GUP questioning, page 178, where it is claimed that quantification was performed using Real Time and that quantification of the Y [chromosome] was not carried out) is not consistent with what was performed in reality. In fact, the tables show that quantification of the DNA extracted from all the samples taken from Exhibit 36 was carried out using the 770 Sequence Detector ABI PRISM™ equipment (Applied Biosystems); in contrast, it is apparent from the attached cards that the aforementioned method was only performed on samples D-E-F-G. A different method was employed for samples A-B-C using the Qubit Fluorometer™, and not mentioned in the final Technical Report, as would have been due and correct.

Regarding the interpretation of the quantification, it should be noted that on page 78, the following is stated: “the samples testing positive to quantification (samples A and B) were subjected to amplification and subsequent capillary electrophoresis…”.

As regards the quantification of sample A (knife handle) the results obtained with the Qubit Fluorimeter™ show that the concentration of DNA in this sample was equal to 0.08 ng/μl. Taking into account that the “quantity of extract” was 50 μl (c.f. SAL), and multiplying 0.08 ng/μl x 50 μl, the total [amount] of DNA was equal to 4 ng: certainly a significant quantity, which allowed sample A to be considered positive to quantification.

On the other hand, it is not possible to comprehend the criteria adopted in the assessment of the positive quantification result for sample B and the negative result for sample C, given that the same result, “too low”, was obtained for both samples: that is, a value which must be considered not only below the sensitivity threshold of the Fluorimeter indicated by the manual (DNA concentrations equal to 0.2 ng/μl), but below 0.08 ng/μl, a value which the Fluorimeter detected for sample A.

Nor is it comprehensible, considering the negative results on sample B, what Dr. Stefanoni reported during the GUP questioning (page 178) where she stated that the DNA in sample B, quantified with Real Time PCR (it is recalled that such quantification as confirmed during the hearing was never carried out or, at least, no documentation was provided to support this claim), was “in the order of some hundreds of picograms”, a value which does not appear in any of the documents provided to us (SAL, Fluorimeter report, Real Time report, RTIGF).

(Emphasis mine.)

Either Stefanoni misrepresented her procedures and the results of her quantification test, or else C&V are misrepresenting what her data actually showed, once she finally handed it over.

 

[Dougm]

I am recanting on calunnia. I no longer agree with Hellman-Zanetti and Massei on Knox's conviction for calunnia towards Patrick Lumumba. That anyone cares what I believe is also a mystery!

Peter Quennell and Peggy Ganong have done a mountain of work supplying the world with an English translation of CNN's May 6, 2011, two hour interview with Mignini. Whereas Quennell and Ganong mean the two-hour transcript to prove that Magnini is a nice and thoughtful, honest guy - actually reading it gie (me) a totally different perception.

He's a bigger weasel than I'd thought. How Quennell and Ganong can read this and think he was simply a "transcriber of Amanda Knox's spontaneous declarations" pushes the limits of credulity, and makes me reach for words which will be banned by the JREF moderators.

See: http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...w With Mignini That CNN SHOULD Have Reflected

Along with this, I can no longer hold to Amanda Knox's conviction on calunnia, as I have until reading Magnini's OWN account of the 1:45-5:45 am interrogation. He says in effect that he only made transcripts of her free and spontaneous declarations, like a notary would.

No wonder the Italian Supreme Court ruled this illegal.... if you believe Mignini, as do Quennell and Ganong, I have a bridge in Manhattan I'd like to sell you.....

All I can say is:

ATTA BOY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Diocletus]

Either Stefanoni misrepresented her procedures and the results of her quantification test, or else C&V are misrepresenting what her data actually showed, once she finally handed it over.

Charlie--I think you know this, but C&V didn't misinterpret the data. Stefanoni lied.

 

[RoseMontague]

Peter Quennell and Peggy Ganong have done a mountain of work supplying the world with an English translation of CNN's May 6, 2011, two hour interview with Mignini. Whereas Quennell and Ganong mean the two-hour transcript to prove that Magnini is a nice and thoughtful, honest guy - actually reading it gie (me) a totally different perception.

I did an analysis on this interview here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7205599&postcount=8864

 

[christianahannah]

I'm curious how you reached that conclusion. What specific scientific advances would lead an expert to request more data in 2010 than they would have requested in 2009? Where did you get this idea?

Also, have you read the English translation of C&V's report? I would encourage you to look at this section in particular:

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/...egarding-item-36-knife/quantification-of-dna/

Here is an excerpt:

...what is reported on page 78 of the RTIGF (and confirmed in the GUP questioning, page 178, where it is claimed that quantification was performed using Real Time and that quantification of the Y [chromosome] was not carried out) is not consistent with what was performed in reality. In fact, the tables show that quantification of the DNA extracted from all the samples taken from Exhibit 36 was carried out using the 770 Sequence Detector ABI PRISM™ equipment (Applied Biosystems); in contrast, it is apparent from the attached cards that the aforementioned method was only performed on samples D-E-F-G. A different method was employed for samples A-B-C using the Qubit Fluorometer™, and not mentioned in the final Technical Report, as would have been due and correct.

Regarding the interpretation of the quantification, it should be noted that on page 78, the following is stated: “the samples testing positive to quantification (samples A and B) were subjected to amplification and subsequent capillary electrophoresis…”.

As regards the quantification of sample A (knife handle) the results obtained with the Qubit Fluorimeter™ show that the concentration of DNA in this sample was equal to 0.08 ng/μl. Taking into account that the “quantity of extract” was 50 μl (c.f. SAL), and multiplying 0.08 ng/μl x 50 μl, the total [amount] of DNA was equal to 4 ng: certainly a significant quantity, which allowed sample A to be considered positive to quantification.

On the other hand, it is not possible to comprehend the criteria adopted in the assessment of the positive quantification result for sample B and the negative result for sample C, given that the same result, “too low”, was obtained for both samples: that is, a value which must be considered not only below the sensitivity threshold of the Fluorimeter indicated by the manual (DNA concentrations equal to 0.2 ng/μl), but below 0.08 ng/μl, a value which the Fluorimeter detected for sample A.

Nor is it comprehensible, considering the negative results on sample B, what Dr. Stefanoni reported during the GUP questioning (page 178) where she stated that the DNA in sample B, quantified with Real Time PCR (it is recalled that such quantification as confirmed during the hearing was never carried out or, at least, no documentation was provided to support this claim), was “in the order of some hundreds of picograms”, a value which does not appear in any of the documents provided to us (SAL, Fluorimeter report, Real Time report, RTIGF).

(Emphasis mine.)

Either Stefanoni misrepresented her procedures and the results of her quantification test, or else C&V are misrepresenting what her data actually showed, once she finally handed it over.

Yes, I did read the report when it was made public.

I have not claimed there were scientific advances which occurred between that time. I sometimes am not always as clear as I should be. And likely, I won't be any clearer now but I will give it a try.

What is being requested by many defense teams in the current past and present is the raw or underlying data which comprises the reports given by the prosecution to the defense. This was not always done (maybe never) in the past, it wasn't part of the finished report (though this is what was used to construct the report). I don't think it was law, or even mandatory, to turn over the raw data in the past. I imagine it was thought it wouldn't make sense or might be misinterpreted. And perhaps there were privacy concerns. So now this material is being given to the defense and it is not as orderly as the written report and it is still being worked through what to ask for and what to give.

I haven't a problem with the defense having all they ask for. They should and rightly so.

 

[RoseMontague]

SAL's attached. Most have the dates. IIRC some that don't have dates are tests on some jeans, socks, bra, duvet, sweatshirt, and sponge. Some have dates on one sample and not the other. The dates that are showing have a gap.

 

[RoseMontague]

The remainder of the SAL's are attached.

 

[Grinder]

I have not claimed there were scientific advances which occurred between that time. I sometimes am not always as clear as I should be. And likely, I won't be any clearer now but I will give it a try.

What is being requested by many defense teams in the current past and present is the raw or underlying data which comprises the reports given by the prosecution to the defense. This was not always done (maybe never) in the past, it wasn't part of the finished report (though this is what was used to construct the report). I don't think it was law, or even mandatory, to turn over the raw data in the past. I imagine it was thought it wouldn't make sense or might be misinterpreted. And perhaps there were privacy concerns. So now this material is being given to the defense and it is not as orderly as the written report and it is still being worked through what to ask for and what to give.

I haven't a problem with the defense having all they ask for. They should and rightly so.

It's hard to imagine that the prosecution could hold back the underlying data for any report. If the prosecution could say a bullet from the accused's gun matched the fatal bullet without providing the bullet how could the defense argue it didn't match the markings of their client's gun.

In the case of LCN DNA with none left to retest it would be like the bullet example if the bullet had been lost or destroyed.

Without the test data the experts for the defense couldn't fully show the quality of Stefanoni's work.

 

[Bill Williams]

I recanted a belief in Knox's complicity in caluunia towards Patrick Lumumba for a reason. It has to do with reading the CNN interview with Mignini, and Mignini's own account of his presence at Amanda Knox's interrogation from 1:45 am to 5:45 am 6 Nov 2011.

I am deeply indebted to Peggy Ganong for seeing to the translation into English, and to Peter Quennell for posting the CNN interview on the TJMK website.

It exposes Mignini for the liar he is. If PM Mignini wants to hold me accountable for that claim, please PM me and I will supply my address.

was reading through Peggy and/or Jools translation of the two hour CNN interview with Mignini where he discusses the connection between the Monster of Florence case, Preston, etc., and I don't think I've read more evasion in my life.

Then the CNN interview turned to the interrogation of Knox in the wee hours of Nov 6. I think the breaking point for me was when Mignini (remember this is Ganong's and/or Jools' translation so they are presenting an English version that casts Mignini in the BEST possible light)......

... was when Mignini said, and I quote from Ganong's translation Mignini's description of the interrogation (my notes are in italic print):

- And thus her interrogation as a person informed of the facts was suspended by the police in compliance with Article 63 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure [c.p.p. - Codice di Procedura Penale], because if evidence appears that incriminates the person, the person being questioned as a person informed of the facts can no longer be heard, and we must stop. “Everyone stop! There must be a defense attorney [present]”. And thus the police stopped and informed Amanda, who had placed herself on the scene of the crime and who said that she had accompanied Lumumba and let him in and that then Lumumba, in the other room, allegedly committed a sexual act and killed Meredith. This is what she said.

- (my note: he lays out the law.... yet someone keeps Memorandum #1. Why? Mignini has just declared it useless and cited the law to the CNN reporter..... And why the hell did he not forbid anyone to touch Knox until a lawyer arrived? I feel Mignini is lying through his teeth here.....)

- Then I was called, I was informed about this, I went to Amanda who, I remember how she was, what she looked like, I remember her very well, she remained imprinted in my memory, I still remember then two things about Amanda that struck me at the time: first, she looked like she was relieved of a burden and second, she was like, and this is another detail that was impressive, it seemed as if she was terrified of Lumumba.

- (my note: amateur psychologizing will be the death of us all - and here is an experienced PM making a rookie mistake, if in fact he isn't simply lying.)

- Then I, as I had in some way to, let’s say… this police interrogation had been suspended. At that point I remember that… they made me notice that Amanda, because she wanted to go on talking, I remember she had, like a need to. So I told her: “you can make statements to me; I will not ask questions, since if you make a spontaneous statement and I collect it, I will collect your statement as if I were in fact a notary ”. She then repeated [her story] to the interpreter, who was Mrs. Donnino, I remember there was a police woman officer who wrote the statement down [verbalizzava], I did not ask questions. She basically repeated what she had told the police and she signed the statement. Basically I didn’t ask Amanda questions. Not before, since the police asked them and I was not there, and not after, since she made spontaneous statements. Had I been asking her questions, a defense attorney should have been there. This is the procedure.

- (note: the bold-underlined part is where I buckled. I've been on the hunt for the divergant point between PGP and innocentatii, and this is it - right here. Do you believe Mignini or don't you? Is Mignini barely an actor in Amanda's drama, or is Mignini the author of the drama? For him to make the claim he was simply an innocent functionary, a notary, is the height of hubris and slime. I now do not know, really, what to make of Ganong, et. al. who cannot see this - and still cling to Knox making "spontaneous statements". In the absense of transcripts or recordings, which I strongly suspect will never surface because it would prove Mignini to be the bully he is...)

Mignini is a liar of the first order, and he lied through his teeth to CNN.

As this goes to calunnia, there is nothing remaining for me to hold Knox criminally accountable for, in relation to all the memorandum I've cited. Knox was a stupid, naive, traumatized 20-year old, and NEEDED A LAWYER BY MIGNINI'S OWN ADMISSION, and then Mignini, "Imagines himself a Notary," to justify there not being one.

Mignini belongs in jail.

 

[Malkmus]

I did an analysis on this interview here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7205599&postcount=8864

The issue of budget cuts/transcribing interrogations struck me as I was re-reading this. I think we all know where the money went now. They were saving up that 180,000 euros to make Mignini's computer-generated opus! His Avatar, if you will...

Anyone else scratching their heads at the possibility of AK and RS flipping the bill for this if the SC overturns the acquittal?

 

[Grinder]

The issue of budget cuts/transcribing interrogations struck me as I was re-reading this. I think we all know where the money went now. They were saving up that 180,000 euros to make Mignini's computer-generated opus! His Avatar, if you will...

Anyone else scratching their heads at the possibility of AK and RS flipping the bill for this if the SC overturns the acquittal?

It seems they also provided a data base to the prosecution of all the court information. I wonder if the defense is given access to this information that could potentially be billed to the defendants?

 

[Malkmus]

I recanted a belief in Knox's complicity in caluunia towards Patrick Lumumba for a reason. It has to do with reading the CNN interview with Mignini, and Mignini's own account of his presence at Amanda Knox's interrogation from 1:45 am to 5:45 am 6 Nov 2011.

I am deeply indebted to Peggy Ganong for seeing to the translation into English, and to Peter Quennell for posting the CNN interview on the TJMK website.

It exposes Mignini for the liar he is. If PM Mignini wants to hold me accountable for that claim, please PM me and I will supply my address.

was reading through Peggy and/or Jools translation of the two hour CNN interview with Mignini where he discusses the connection between the Monster of Florence case, Preston, etc., and I don't think I've read more evasion in my life.

Then the CNN interview turned to the interrogation of Knox in the wee hours of Nov 6. I think the breaking point for me was when Mignini (remember this is Ganong's and/or Jools' translation so they are presenting an English version that casts Mignini in the BEST possible light)......

... was when Mignini said, and I quote from Ganong's translation Mignini's description of the interrogation (my notes are in italic print):

- And thus her interrogation as a person informed of the facts was suspended by the police in compliance with Article 63 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure [c.p.p. - Codice di Procedura Penale], because if evidence appears that incriminates the person, the person being questioned as a person informed of the facts can no longer be heard, and we must stop. “Everyone stop! There must be a defense attorney [present]”. And thus the police stopped and informed Amanda, who had placed herself on the scene of the crime and who said that she had accompanied Lumumba and let him in and that then Lumumba, in the other room, allegedly committed a sexual act and killed Meredith. This is what she said.

- (my note: he lays out the law.... yet someone keeps Memorandum #1. Why? Mignini has just declared it useless and cited the law to the CNN reporter..... And why the hell did he not forbid anyone to touch Knox until a lawyer arrived? I feel Mignini is lying through his teeth here.....)

- Then I was called, I was informed about this, I went to Amanda who, I remember how she was, what she looked like, I remember her very well, she remained imprinted in my memory, I still remember then two things about Amanda that struck me at the time: first, she looked like she was relieved of a burden and second, she was like, and this is another detail that was impressive, it seemed as if she was terrified of Lumumba.

- (my note: amateur psychologizing will be the death of us all - and here is an experienced PM making a rookie mistake, if in fact he isn't simply lying.)

- Then I, as I had in some way to, let’s say… this police interrogation had been suspended. At that point I remember that… they made me notice that Amanda, because she wanted to go on talking, I remember she had, like a need to. So I told her: “you can make statements to me; I will not ask questions, since if you make a spontaneous statement and I collect it, I will collect your statement as if I were in fact a notary ”. She then repeated [her story] to the interpreter, who was Mrs. Donnino, I remember there was a police woman officer who wrote the statement down [verbalizzava], I did not ask questions. She basically repeated what she had told the police and she signed the statement. Basically I didn’t ask Amanda questions. Not before, since the police asked them and I was not there, and not after, since she made spontaneous statements. Had I been asking her questions, a defense attorney should have been there. This is the procedure.

- (note: the bold-underlined part is where I buckled. I've been on the hunt for the divergant point between PGP and innocentatii, and this is it - right here. Do you believe Mignini or don't you? Is Mignini barely an actor in Amanda's drama, or is Mignini the author of the drama? For him to make the claim he was simply an innocent functionary, a notary, is the height of hubris and slime. I now do not know, really, what to make of Ganong, et. al. who cannot see this - and still cling to Knox making "spontaneous statements". In the absense of transcripts or recordings, which I strongly suspect will never surface because it would prove Mignini to be the bully he is...)

Mignini is a liar of the first order, and he lied through his teeth to CNN.

As this goes to calunnia, there is nothing remaining for me to hold Knox criminally accountable for, in relation to all the memorandum I've cited. Knox was a stupid, naive, traumatized 20-year old, and NEEDED A LAWYER BY MIGNINI'S OWN ADMISSION, and then Mignini, "Imagines himself a Notary," to justify there not being one.

Mignini belongs in jail.

There's really no way to reconcile Mignini's version of being called in and simply listening to Amanda restate the same story when there is a 4 hour gap between the two statements.

My favorite line from the 5:45am statement: "I imagined what could have happened."

 

[Malkmus]

It's funny how off the mark Mignini was and how bad his intuition is.

I still remember then two things about Amanda that struck me at the time: first, she looked like she was relieved of a burden

This was exactly what Hellmann was referring to wasn't it. That she said whatever they wanted to put an end to the interrogation.

and second, she was like, and this is another detail that was impressive, it seemed as if she was terrified of Lumumba.

This is ironic. We know she wasn't afraid of Lumumba for obvious reasons, but mainly the fact that Mignini sees a terrified 19 year-old foreigner and doesn't understand that she might, just might, be terrified because she's spent the last three hours being verbally and physically threatened over the mistranslation of a text message.