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

[bolint]

By identifying him but not naming him, I guess she was trying to have it both ways: put him in the frame without being too obvious about it.

Yes, something like that.

I'm not clear whether you knew that Amanda had listed Rudy among the men who'd visited the downstairs flat, but if you didn't, how does that change your position on this?

Not much. The identification Malkmus quoted below is about the same as not flushing Rudy's deposit.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Stefanoni and TMB; day of 5 November

It is sometimes asserted with respect to this case that a negative TMB test can be explained away by the lesser sensitivity of TMB versus luminol. This has been discussed before, but let’s now see what the Hellmann report has to say:

“Professor Tagliabracci, specified, without being refuted (hearing of July 18 2009, p. 174), that the tetramethylbenzedine (TMB) test is very sensitive, so much as to give a positive result even with only five red blood cells present. Dr. Stefanoni herself, moreover, clarified (preliminary hearing of October 4 2008) that, while a positive test result could be deceptive due to reactivity of the chemical [evidenziatore] with other substances, a negative result gives certainty that no blood is present.”

[Impronte evidenziate dal luminol con profilo biologico utile, pp. 100-106; translated by roteoctober]

This passage indicates that a negative TMB result carries more weight than a positive result, but it also means that Stefanoni’s failure to provide this information to the defense is even more difficult to justify.

With respect to when Amanda became a suspect, some of the newer members of this conversation may not be aware of something Malkmus posted in one of the threads quite some time ago and later at Websleuths. It was a link to an Italian news story from 5 November, and the summary (which began with the words "ominous news", IIRC) said that it was not out of the question that a witness (or witnesses?) would be converted into suspects within the next several hours.

 

[Dan O.]

I understand the discussion here about how the police did not have rational reason to have singled out Amanda and Raffaele, but I think that once they saw what they thought was odd behavior, from the kissing, to the stretching/cartwheels, to the pizza eating, hip swivel, it all confirmed to them that she was involved somehow.

I think you have that backwards. Just try and find a contemporaneous record of Amanda and Raffaele's suspect behavior. It's all backfill after the arrest.

 

[Dan O.]

I find it strange. They are supposed to "absolutely innocents", they have spent four years in jail and not a single discussion of the case after their release? (Regardless of whether they are in love or are estranged.)

We're you the one claiming to be a lawyer or was that someone else.

Only the second trial is over. There is still the appeal and several side cases going on.

 

[bookworm]

Naming a fellow perp is rarely a good strategy because it usually backfires.

Well, it sure happens a heck of alot of time!!!

 

[bookworm]

I have a question if someone would be kind enough to answer. I've read elsewhere this morning that Hellman released A&R on the paragraph 2 (not enough evidence to convict). Also, that Hellman erred in not stating the paragraph number.

I was under the distinct impression from what I've seen everywhere else up until this time, that they were acquitted under the paragraph 1 (not having committed the act). In fact, I've been under the impression from knowledgable Italians that the judge DOES NOT expressly state Paragraph 1 or Paragraph 2, he only reads the description.

Can someone please clarify? Thank you!

 

[anglolawyer]

Naming a fellow perp is rarely a good strategy because it usually backfires.

That is ludicrously simplistic. You have to imagine yourself properly and fully in the shoes of the two of them had they been guilty.

The likeliest future in that event would be life in prison, not some miraculous escape resulting from all the evidence turning out to be bad (not least because it would not have been). As a reasonable indicator of how a guilty person would play things, just check out Rudy. Once Amanda knows Raffaele has ratted on her the likeliest move for her would be to implicate him both in retaliation and self defence.

 

[geebee2]

I find it strange. They are supposed to "absolutely innocents", they have spent four years in jail and not a single discussion of the case after their release? (Regardless of whether they are in love or are estranged.)

The case is still ongoing - until the supreme court has ruled ( which I guess could take a year or more ) their lawyers will almost certainly have told them to make absolutely no public comments.

Especially considering that Mignini has been generating extra slander cases ( which are also ongoing ) like a demented ... well I have no words for it.

Unless they decide to go ahead and publish their books anyway, if they are not willing to wait for the SC to rule.

 

[Bill Williams]

That is ludicrously simplistic. You have to imagine yourself properly and fully in the shoes of the two of them had they been guilty.

The likeliest future in that event would be life in prison, not some miraculous escape resulting from all the evidence turning out to be bad (not least because it would not have been). As a reasonable indicator of how a guilty person would play things, just check out Rudy. Once Amanda knows Raffaele has ratted on her the likeliest move for her would be to implicate him both in retaliation and self defence.

Knox as a 20 year old had this annoyingly naive belief that the truth would prevail, evev when under the belief that Raf had turned on her. That is soooooooo Seattle. Rather than being mad as hell that no on believed her (except for the bizarre imaginings about Lumumba), someone from Seattle sits in naive bewilderment. And of course, a truly guilty person cuts their losses, in exactly the manner Guede did. This is not rocket science. To impose complex psychological strategies onto Knox's actions shows how ridiculous such imaginings are. Guede fled after the crime, Guede minimized his actions, and he cut a deal. That what perps do. Naive innocents tell the truth as Knox did consistently once Guede was on the scene. I'm just hoping it wasn't dumb luck that eventually vindicated Knox. If 26 years had been upheld, any Seattleite would have done the time bewildered rather than bitter.

 

[Dan O.]

As a reasonable indicator of how a guilty person would play things, just check out Rudy.

Rudy must have spent a lot of time working on his alibi while on the run before his capture in Germany. Thanks to the early police leaks, he was able to learn the thoughts behind the police investigation. For instance, one early news report said that the police were speculating that Meredith might have met someone at a party on the 31st and arranged to meet them Nov. 1. One blogger discussing the early case speculated that the "AF" Rudy mentions might have originated from the name Alessandra Formica (except she was the witness and not the runner and I don't think this was reported before Rudy's arrest).

 

[Bill Williams]

I find it strange. They are supposed to "absolutely innocents", they have spent four years in jail and not a single discussion of the case after their release? (Regardless of whether they are in love or are estranged.)

First of all, Raffaele has given interviews on Italian TV. Because Raffaele really has not insight into how the crime went down (he was not there) this means that he really is a boring interviewee, unless your story is, "How do you cope in prison knowing you are innocent?"

As for Knox, this is EXACTLY what she said she'd do. It was only PGP who tauntingly from the sidelines (or from behind a pseudp on the internet) challenged her like bullies to "come clean". When she didn't these same people filled the void with conspiractorializing her relationship with her family, saying stupid things like, "She knows she did it so she has to be quiet," or "Her family knows she did it, but they can't say so, because they'll ruin the book deal." Stupid things like that.

What I cannot understand, after ALL everyone has gone through, is, why can't people just do the straightforward thing..... Knox and her family said they wanted privacy, said they wanted to be out of the public eye for a long while after four years of torture.... and this is exactly what they are doing?

It is the height of irony that the British tabloids are still harrassing them in Seattle, yelling out questions like, "Hey, Foxy: how are you enjoying your anonimity!???" <Click> <Click> "Hey, luv, how about a smile!"

I think they are sick and tired of having their beings being created for them.

And if by this you mean, "why haven't Raf and Amanda had a discussion of this together," what possible business of yours is that? That is what I call voyeurism.

You do know that these are real people and not SitComm characters?

 

[NewtonTrino]

I continue to be amazed at how people won't let go of this case.

It was an obvious police prosecution foul-up. It's open and shut. How someone could think Amanda/Raf were actually involved blows me mind. Then I remember that churches are full every sunday and it all clicks into place.

Oh well, one thing is for sure, with the continued interest in the case Amanda is going to become a very rich girl. After all we know the PMF peeps will buy/watch anything that comes out on this case so they can twist it somehow.

 

[Dougm]

I think you have that backwards. Just try and find a contemporaneous record of Amanda and Raffaele's suspect behavior. It's all backfill after the arrest.

But there is no contemporaneous record of anything, from the police point of view. All we have is what they told the media, and I think they were spinning at that point.

I am just going by common sense. I have no doubt Amanda was suspicious to them from the first second, and she would have been to me too (not because of the hip swivels, etc., but because of being at the crime scene with a somewhat odd sounding story about taking a shower and not noticing the blood, etc.). Then the continuing behavior that they thought was odd, plus that being seconded by Meredith's friends, etc. in the days following. It is pretty normal that when such a shocking thing occurs, everyone looks at each other, wondering if any of them could have some connection to the killing. And Amanda was the outsider to all of them.

 

[Grinder]

It is sometimes asserted with respect to this case that a negative TMB test can be explained away by the lesser sensitivity of TMB versus luminol. This has been discussed before, but let’s now see what the Hellmann report has to say:
This passage indicates that a negative TMB result carries more weight than a positive result, but it also means that Stefanoni’s failure to provide this information to the defense is even more difficult to justify.

Halides - isn't it also the case that while Luminol may be more sensitive, in that it can pick up a smaller concentration, it must be interpreted as to how brightly it reacts. Whereas TMB is just a color change when in the presence of blood, Luminol will light up with a fairly large number of substances albeit turnip juice probably wasn't the source.

With respect to when Amanda became a suspect, some of the newer members of this conversation may not be aware of something Malkmus posted in one of the threads quite some time ago and later at Websleuths. It was a link to an Italian news story from 5 November, and the summary (which began with the words "ominous news", IIRC) said that it was not out of the question that a witness (or witnesses?) would be converted into suspects within the next several hours.

Interesting. I'd like to see more of the Italian news accounts. Even the English language publications had so much material, so quickly, it is clear the police had been focusing on the kids from very early on. I don't know whether to believe the accounts of police smelling sex on Amanda but I do believe that the swivel, cartwheels, kissing, and their vague accounts put them on the top of the list from the beginning.

 

[freeski]

There's been a lot of talk about when Amanda was suspected, when was Lumumba suspected, why was Romanelli not suspected etc. I've made some notes from Follain's book. Now one can have an opinion on how valid his reporting is; he may have a PGP bias but it's also possible that what he reports is what people told him, which is a guide to what was being thought at the time.

My conclusions from below are that:

1. They strongly suspected an insider job from the start.
2. Sophie accused Amanda of bringing a lot of strange men back to the cottage, plus Amanda's "strange" behaviour made her a suspect from day 1.
3. They were continually looking for a link to a black man from day 1.
4. Amanda hugged Lumumba on morning of 5th --> that's when 2+2 = 26. [Bill, I think this is when Lumumba came on the radar, after other black men had been eliminated].
5. From the viciousness of Mignini arrest warrant towards Amanda, he suspected her all along.
6. I'm now coming to the strong conclusion that the black man and Raffaele were just collateral. Mignini wanted to get Amanda. Period!

Here's my synopsis of the chronology from Follain. You'll need to concentrate!

Nov 2nd

• faeces in toilet implies someone else other than women of house.
• Break-in is staged (Napoleoni and Mignini agree on this) --> there must be someone in the house involved --> someone in the house with an outside accomplice.
• Break-in staged--> not looking for a burglar.
• naked girl so motive is sexual --> male attacker involved
• quilt is mark of pity --> relationship between killer and victim --> woman
• Filomena talked a lot to police at cottage and indicated Amanda’s story made no sense.
• Filomena throws suspicion on Amanda very early on (e.g. in Questura)
• Sophie first interview on 2nd asked if Meredith knew any black men.
• People who thought Amanda’s behaviour odd on first day: Filomena, Napoleoni, Mignini, Sophie, Laura, Amy, Natalie.
• Laura ruled out mark on Amanda's neck being a lovebite under interrogation.
  
• Sophie told police about Hicham Khiri dropping trousers at Meredith.
• Night of 2nd Amanda & Raffaele spend night at questura; English friends sent home.
• Probably Filomena and Marco held as well. All went home at 6am.
• Amanda not allowed to fly home; English girls were allowed to fly home.

[in Candace Dempsey's book it is also stated that Sophie told the police that Amanda brought a lot of strange men back to the house]

Nov 3rd

• Sophie denied to fly home on 3rd as she went back to questura to give more info.
• Some cop suggests slit throat --> possibility of Muslim or north African as perp.
• Mignini stays with insider job thesis. Inclined to rule out Filomena.
• Asked cops to keep tabs on Amanda and boys downstairs, including phone taps.
  
• Amanda at police station at 1pm (acc to Raffaelle)
• Mignini and Napoleoni went back to cottage with Amanda.
• Amanda mentions work at le Chic. Mentions Shaky (Hicham Khiri).
• Amanda relative mentions to Edda police are talking a lot to Amanda.
• Sophie’s father comments to Sophie that Amanda is involved.

[On 3rd Hicham Khiri was picked up at 2am and questioned till 4am by Chiacchiera. This is from trial testimony. This is probably in response to Sophie's mention of him dropping his trousers]

Nov 4th

• Amanda sends email to all friends --> sent to Seattle cops --> sent to Perugian police.
• At autopsy Mignini concludes beyond doubt more than one attacker.
• Lalli concludes only one knife but Mignini wants it to be more than one knife.
• Cops worried about lack of progress. Called M’s friends back to questura.
• Napoleoni views Raffaelle clinging to Amanda as odd --> bugs room they talk in at 4.30pm.
• Amanda talks about Shaky and how bad he is when ending relationships with women.
• Amanda only had 2 hours sleep night before.
• Cops asked about M’s sex life. Yelled at Amanda. Police stressing her out. Trying to make her say something.
• Napoleoni takes Amanda, Filomena and Laura to cottage while Raffaele gets pizzas.
• At night fall with Mignini they look for missing knives --> Amanda breaks down. First time Mignini and Napoleoni have seen Amanda cry.
• Laura and Filomena later identify clothes in washing machine as Meredith’s with some of Amanda’s.
• Back to police station. Amanda & Raffaele are bugged talking --> brief mention of the knives.
• Robyn questioned by British police --> statements sent to Perugian police --> learn more about Shaky (Hicham Khari, a Moroccan).
• Napoleoni established Shaky had nothing to do with murder --> suspected Amanda had tried to implicate him with stories (see above).
• Sophie also still interrogated lots by police asking about Halloween photos --> questions about Giacomo and Pisco.
• Napoleoni eliminates 4 boys downstairs as suspects.
• Mignini and Napoleoni interview Stefano Bonassi --> he mentions recent visits of The Baron a South African very attracted to Amanda. No real name yet. --> learn that he fell asleep on toilet and didn’t flush.
• Napoleoni only finds out much later The Baron is Rudy. [freeski notes: this sounds very implausible to me. Why would she not follow this up immediately? The guy has skipped town!! Tells me they're totally focused on Amanda.]
• Laura, Filomena and Amanda meet to talk about how to manage cottage, rent etc.
• All agreed to reject requests for interviews with media.
• Laura and Filomena ask Amanda about morning of discovery --> they're surprised cops interested in M’s sex life --> Raffaele claim body was covered in Vaseline.
• Raffele stressed out that night.

[Sometime on the 4th Hiram Khiri was interviewed once again. Again this is from his trial testimony]

Nov 5th

• Amanda goes to 9am class.
• Amanda bumps into Lumumba at lunchtime --> hugs Lumumba.
• Kerchers appoint Maresca (recommended by consul).
• Maresca aware of speculation that friends of Meredith’s may be involved.
• Sophie questioned again --> she got to her flat at 9pm on 1st.
• Napoleoni decides to question Raffaele again because his account confusing. [freeski notes: this is when they finally decide to break the pair. They know Edda is coming. Time is running out to get a confession]
• Cops aware A&R mobile phones had become inactive on night or murder --> Amanda’s from 8.35 to midday, Raffaele’s from 8.42 to 6.02am --> records show both usually left mobiles on at night.
• Napoleoni gets very annoyed when they delay coming in --> those two are annoying me. Both turn up at 10.30pm.
• Raffaele questioned from 10.40 onwards.
• Napoleoni sees Amanda doing splits and cartwheels at about 11pm --> also did yoga poses.
• Raffaele makes false statement --> returned home alone at 9pm on 1st [freeski notes: clearly wrong because neighbour saw both there at 8.40] --> Amanda arrives home at 1am.
• At 11pm Amanda quizzed by several detectives in waiting area --> gives list from her mobile address book of men Meredith had known to Ficarra (from Sicily) --> map of addresses given.
• Men mentioned were Patrick, Yuve (Algerian), Shaky, black South African basketball player. [freeski notes: funny how these are all African guys!]
• Amanda admits her and Raffaele smoke dope --> Raffaele used to use acid and cocaine but not now --> Raffaele suffered from depression.
• Earlier in evening Mignini watches TV prog about North African man spotted washing clothes in laundrette on day of murder and who now had disappeared --> police had heard about this guy on evening of first day of murder and had ruled him out.
• Evening vigil was that evening.
• Mignini goes to sleep at 10.30 pm. Woken at 11pm --> goes to questura --> tells wife this will be a long night --> finds lots of detectives there despite late hour. [freeski notes: because he ordered them to be there!!]

Nov 6th

• After midnight Raffaele stops Amanda’s alibi --> question Amanda again on the record. --> with interpreter at 1.45am Ficurra and two detectives start to question Amanda.
• Showing text message --> Amanda’s emotional shock --> accuses Lumumba [freeski notes: bollocks!]
• Chiacchiera wants to put all under surveillance as arresting now is no good. [Chiacchiera is removed from case after the arrests]
• Napoleoni wants them all arrested --> preparations to get Lumumba.
• Raffaele questioned till 3.30am (5 hours total).
• 5.45am Mignini asks Amanda to make statement of own volition. [freeski notes: bollocks!]
• Asks if she wants lawyer --> she says no. [freeski notes: bollocks!]
• Mignini notices red mark in middle of throat --> thinks nothing more of it.
• On leaving Mignini sees statement as confirmation of what he had always thought about insider --> Amanda is a beauty but also actress, calculating and shameless liar. [freeski notes: so is Mignini without the beauty]
• Shoe print under duvet was size 42.5 and could be Raffaele’s. [freeski notes: actually it was Rudy's]
• Also found jackknife in Raffaele's pocket with 3 inch blade found that morning consistent with wounds. [freeski notes: this had nothing to do with murder]
• Mignini particularly critical of Amanda in the arrest warrant --> accused her of leading Raffaele astray.
• Before arresting pair, detectives search their houses --> remove 3 x Amanda diaries + laptop --> find Raffaele’s violent manga comics --> Finzi chooses the knife in his kitchen --> Chiacchiera tells him take it. [freeski notes: Mignini wanted a second knife. I presume he told them to take one]
• Found newspaper from 3rd saying boyfriend and friends are suspects (a reporter had found and interviewed Raffaele and given him these newspapers).
• Knife removed from evidence bag and put in diary box --> sent to forensics in Rome
• Amanda arrested at midday witnessed by Napoleoni and 35 officers (standard practice apparently).
• Amanda burst out: you used me, stressed me, yelled at me, accused me of murder.
• Mignini suspects hard drugs but no traces found in hair.
• News conference to announce case closed.
• Amanda retracts and in “gift” accuses police of brutality.

 

[Skind]

Naming a fellow perp is rarely a good strategy because it usually backfires.

Usually because it puts the person on the scene and indicates they have knowledge of the crime an innocent person shouldn't have.

Exactly what happened when Knox named Lumumba.

The problem a false identification offers, is that you can not claim coercion or threats as a mitigating factor, as the person was clearly not there to offer those threats.

 

[Bill Williams]

There's been a lot of talk about when Amanda was suspected, when was Lumumba suspected, why was Romanelli not suspected etc. I've made some notes from Follain's book. Now one can have an opinion on how valid his reporting is; he may have a PGP bias but it's also possible that what he reports is what people told him, which is a guide to what was being thought at the time.

My conclusions from below are that:

Wow! Thanks for this - it is a lot to digest.... but thanks!

 

[Antony]

First of all, Raffaele has given interviews on Italian TV. Because Raffaele really has not insight into how the crime went down (he was not there) this means that he really is a boring interviewee, unless your story is, "How do you cope in prison knowing you are innocent?"

As for Knox, this is EXACTLY what she said she'd do. It was only PGP who tauntingly from the sidelines (or from behind a pseudp on the internet) challenged her like bullies to "come clean". When she didn't these same people filled the void with conspiractorializing her relationship with her family, saying stupid things like, "She knows she did it so she has to be quiet," or "Her family knows she did it, but they can't say so, because they'll ruin the book deal." Stupid things like that.

What I cannot understand, after ALL everyone has gone through, is, why can't people just do the straightforward thing..... Knox and her family said they wanted privacy, said they wanted to be out of the public eye for a long while after four years of torture.... and this is exactly what they are doing?

It is the height of irony that the British tabloids are still harrassing them in Seattle, yelling out questions like, "Hey, Foxy: how are you enjoying your anonimity!???" <Click> <Click> "Hey, luv, how about a smile!"

I think they are sick and tired of having their beings being created for them.

And if by this you mean, "why haven't Raf and Amanda had a discussion of this together," what possible business of yours is that? That is what I call voyeurism.

You do know that these are real people and not SitComm characters?

My thoughts entirely. Amanda and Raff were together just 10 days before 5 November, then thanks to the dog's breakfast that the police made of the case, we know practically everything they did together. Their relationship was still fresh when they were both thrown in jail and kept there for 4 years for no reason.

None of this was the fault of Amanda, and (if you can have something less then nothing) even less so that of Raffaele. He and his family can be forgiven for not wanting anything more to do with her - I'm sure there are relatives of his thinking (and perhaps even saying): "if only he hadn't got involved with that girl, we'd have been spared all of this".

Now you and I are in this discussion for a range of reasons: from sifting over the details of the crime and the events that led to Amanda and Raff's arrest, to speculating about whether they can ever be compensated, and whether those responsible for the mess will ever be held to account. But there are still some who still try to intrude into their privacy, and ask impertinent questions such as "is it true that they haven't had any contact since coming out of prison?"

 

[Malkmus]

Thank you for this quote. When was this note made?

11pm November 5th.

Yes, because its a difficult position for her.
Let the police find him but not directly through you is a reasonable strategy if you are not the chief perp and want to get away with it cleanly.

But you realize then that there is no way for her have to have avoided suspicion in your book, no matter what she did. She names him, guilty. She doesn't name him, guilty. She describes him but doesn't name him, guilty. I'd be willing to say that the whole naming of Rudy is inconclusive, except for the fact that when she did try to indicate him to police she didn't even know his name. This is more telling than anything. Had she named him specifically by his first name, rather than a description, how would that have been any worse for her? She was just listing off people who visited the cottage. By not naming him, her vague description went completely unnoticed. What strategy is that? This is actually one of the biggest pieces of evidence favoring innocence that I can see actually. If her goal was to throw suspicion on Rudy, the LEAST she could have done was remember his name as someone who at one time casually visited the cottage and passed that on to ILE. You want to have it too many ways.

 

[Grinder]

On leaving Mignini sees statement as confirmation of what he had always thought about insider --> Amanda is a beauty but also actress, calculating and shameless liar. [freeski notes: so is Mignini without the beauty]
Shoe print under duvet was size 42.5 and could be Raffaele’s. [freeski notes: actually it was Rudy's]
Also found jackknife in Raffaele's pocket with 3 inch blade found that morning consistent with wounds. [freeski notes: this had nothing to do with murder]
Mignini particularly critical of Amanda in the arrest warrant --> accused her of leading Raffaele astray.

Thanks for the whole list - hoping you just had to cut and paste

A couple of things: Do you have the entire arrest warrant?

Where did the "three inch knife matching the wound" phrase come from? All the early reports had it as a penknife, a jackknife, a chard of glass or even a screwdriver, which made it so very strange that they then claimed the murder weapon was the large kitchen knife.

Does he go into Lumumba's arrest and an explanation of why his interrogation wasn't recorded?