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

[Kaosium]

There's one more possibility: they determined that the cell tower that picked up the SMS was from the one that served the cottage as well as Le Chic. Off the top of my head that's how I remember the argument being made, though I do not recall the distance or how probable it was the same tower would serve them.

Something struck me about Dan-O's Mirror piece:

Detectives were still hunting a fourth man - thought to be North African - caught on CCTV in a car park near Meredith's Perugia flat.

However, they have downplayed his possible involvement.

Very interesting in my view, first because this article doesn't even mention Amanda in reference to the CCTV camera like the 'clear cut' Fox/Times piece dated the same day reporting similar news does; however it does reference the 'fourth man thought to be North African' as being caught on that camera.

At this point they must realize that figure from the CCTV cannot possibly be Patrick, but I cannot help but wonder if that's what they might have thought on November 6th before they 'interviewed' him?

Does anyone remember an earlier piece that mentions the CCTV clip in reference to the male figure? Or at all before the trial?

 

[Dan O.]

Here is what I found:

Catnip's translation at PMF merely summarizes these pages, this is from a google translate version that I don't have a url for, though Dan-O may know where this and the original Italian version may be found if I recall correctly.

The original (of what's been released) was found here:
2007-11-09 Sunday Times -[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2843350.ece Judge's report] They apparently want a login now to access it.

ETA: Google also finds the PDF at IIP.

The PDF that was released was so bad that it resisted OCR conversion to text and had to be hand transcribed.

La volontà di Diya Lumumba di evitare che in sede di indagini si potesse risalire allo stesso in 
considerazione del messaggio inviato ad Amanda la sera dell q novembre, si evidenzia in un suo 
strano comportamento relativo al cambio del suo telefonino proprio nei giorni immediatamente 
successivi al fatto; tale circostanza è incontrovertible in quanto dall'acquisizione del traffico 
telefonico emerge che il predetto fino al 2 novembre ha utilizzato un telefonino avente IMEI n. 
354548014227980 mentre il giorno del fermo aveva in uso un telefonino con IMEI n. 
354548014227987.
Tale circostanza sarebbe rimasta neutra se lo stesso l'avesse ammessa, dal momento che 
continuando a sfruttare lo stesso numero non vi sarebbero stati comunque ostacoli a risalire al 
medesimo, ma ciò che contribuisce invece a dargli rilievo è proprio l'ostinazione del predetto nel 
negarla, elemento questo che induce a ritenere che lo stesso l'abbia fatto proprio sull'erroneo 
convincimento di essere in grado cosi di sviare la sua identificazione.

 

[Briars]

Briars, I agree. His posts on this case and the Misseri case have been filled with valuable reporting.

Frank's arrest in Perugia with allegations against Mignini is the same person who also has had recent trouble in Canada , Seattle and Hawaii. Apart from that coincidence , if you are a member at IIP read the Sfarzgate thread to see how the man thinks. If we don't agree he's a credible source its no surprise to me.

 

[Kaosium]

LOL - well you did pretty good anyways

Thanks!

Err...by the way, I saw the vanguard bumping booties a few pages back. So...do you all stand with Marx or Bakunin regarding the lumpenproleteriat?




One interesting development in this case, something that makes me wish a certain red diaper baby was still posting here (you might have met him at IIP--you may be very surprised who!) was that Italy has different unions for their police forces, mainly based upon their political affiliations. Unfortunately I do not recall for certain which one was which, though it seemed it was divided vaguely into 'left' and 'right' and the one affiliated with most of the Polizia di Stato in Perugia might have been the SAP?


I think I also heard reports that it was the police unions (mostly) responsible for the 'protesting' which occurred when Amanda and Raffaele were acquitted in the appeal. That always struck me as odd, what did they hope to accomplish, if that was in fact the case?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

tangential

Frank's arrest in Perugia with allegations against Mignini is the same person who also has had recent trouble in Canada , Seattle and Hawaii. Apart from that coincidence , if you are a member at IIP read the Sfarzgate thread to see how the man thinks. If we don't agree he's a credible source its no surprise to me.

Briars, Frank's arrest is only a small part of PM Mignini's actions, whereas the most direct sources of information about Mignini's methods are his words and the legal actions he has pursued. I have discussed this at length upthread. I have read a small portion of the IA thread and decided that Frank may be the house guest from **** but that the whole matter was tangential to the case, as RWVBWL has eloquently explained. Charlie Wilkes' comment is succinct and to the point. Frank's credibility as a reporter is dependent on the accuracy of his reports. The same is true of Follain and Nadeau. What do you think about their errors, and do you still find those two reporters credible in spite of them? What did you think of the reports on the Aldrovandi and Misseri cases, as given in the links I provided?

 

[Briars]

Briars, Frank's arrest is only a small part of PM Mignini's actions, whereas the most direct sources of information about Mignini's methods are his words and the legal actions he has pursued. I have discussed this at length upthread. I have read a small portion of the IA thread and decided that Frank may be the house guest from **** but that the whole matter was tangential to the case, as RWVBWL has eloquently explained. Charlie Wilkes' comment is succinct and to the point. Frank's credibility as a reporter is dependent on the accuracy of his reports. The same is true of Follain and Nadeau. What do you think about their errors, and do you still find those two reporters credible in spite of them? What did you think of the reports on the Aldrovandi and Misseri cases, as given in the links I provided?

Anyone that accuses his host of sexual molestation and thinks that another generous host wanted to be raped is more that a "guest from hell". The account he gave of his arrest in Perugia will be exposed for what it was another domestic incident I'm sure. His stories are total fabrications IMO and not by any means small errors. One has to only read his abusive rants of those that gave him money to realize something is very off here.

 

[Bill Williams]

Anyone that accuses his host of sexual molestation and thinks that another generous host wanted to be raped is more that a "guest from hell". The account he gave of his arrest in Perugia will be exposed for what it was another domestic incident I'm sure. His stories are total fabrications IMO and not by any means small errors. One has to only read his abusive rants of those that gave him money to realize something is very off here.

Briars is bringing in the canard of Frank's time in Canada, Hawaii and Seattle. True, something is very off here.... what is off is the suggestion that whatever it was which happened on this side of the Atlantic has anything to do with exposing Mignini for what he is on that side of the Atlantic.

The strange thing is that whenever actions on this side of the Atlantic have been judged by an impartial court, Frank has always been vindicated. And even if he had not been vindicated, what possible relevance could that have to, say for example, a kitchen knife pulled from Raffaele's drawer which matches no forensics, and which requires judges like Judge Massei to literally invent out of thin air a strange story for how it got from to the cottage and back into the drawer at Raffaele's?

So there is the reporting from Perugia, complete trivia about Canada, Hawaii and Seattle which at the end of the day has nothing to do with anything, and the continuing attempt to link Frank's reportings with non-events on this side of the Atlantic.

How do we know these are non-events - because every lawful adjudicator who has ruled on it has vindicated Mr. Sfarzo. It seems someone is pushing him into harms' way.... and whenever he gets before a judge, the judge looks at the evidence and says, "Why are you here? There's nothing against you!"

There does, however, seem to be a continuing attempt to vilify the man. I do not endorse his subsequent comments at all - that's not the point here - he's lashing out at his detractors in the most unhelpful way possible.

But there's a concerted attempt to link all of these non-issues with Perugia. Why? I think I know why. March is going to be a tough month for Mr. Mignini, and once the wrongful prosecution of two innocents is dispensed with, the Italian judiciary can turn itself on to the real issues with what went wrong in prosecuting the events of the horrible Meredith Kercher murder.

My bet is that Sfarzo, Canada, Hawaii and Seattle will not get a mention in that judicial process.

Over the last 24 months or so, ever since the DNA evidence fell apart, those who still support the prosecution are moving their debate farther and farther away from that bedroom in the cottage in Perugia. Massei moved Knox out into the hall, and now folk like Briars are arguing about Canada, Hawaii and Seattle.

No one believes the prosecution anymore and those chickens are soon to come home to roost.

 

[Bill Williams]

Frank's arrest in Perugia with allegations against Mignini is the same person who also has had recent trouble in Canada , Seattle and Hawaii. Apart from that coincidence , if you are a member at IIP read the Sfarzgate thread to see how the man thinks. If we don't agree he's a credible source its no surprise to me.

Ha! That's an example of how the man thinks when he's under attack from people who push him into judicial harms' way.... is it a good way of thinking? Of course not. But it's amazing how people do not consider the overall context.

Ever since Mignini had his blog shut down - an action reminiscent of the Chinese government - and since the cops beat down his door and tried to have him committed - which the attending doctor refused to do....

Frank has been judicially harassed, which is a common theme among some. The facts of these cases don't seem to matter, the point is to harass Frank. Frank is being harassed even about judicial non-events: like Canada!!!!

But at the end of the day - what possible relevance does this have to the coming SC decision? None. It's shooting the messenger simply because someone does not like the message.

 

[Grinder]

If the PLE had the phone logs including locations from the beginning that would explain why Filomena and other "key holder" as well as the downstairs residents might have been placed on the back-back burner.

Here in the greatest country on earth, we require subpoenas, court orders and warrants to access phone records. It would be interesting to know what the Italians have to do and when they acquired the various records.

It is dangerous to rely on books or feature stories written years after the fact because they oft have agendas and lack the wide spread exposure stories at the time receive. Sorry Kermit but very few read your book reviews.

Raf's account of not breaking down until after Amanda talked and signed, besides destroying Anglo's theory , does explain why the PLE would have changed their beliefs between 1:45 and 5:45.

I find one of the strangest alleged facts is that some of the police wanted to release Amanda after she admitted to being at the cottage. It just seems wacky in principal and undermines the concerted effort theory of the PLE. If Chicho would oppose keeping AK in custody wouldn't he also have other independent thoughts on the case and be a danger to the conspiracy?

 

[Bill Williams]

It is dangerous to rely on books or feature stories written years after the fact because they oft have agendas and lack the wide spread exposure stories at the time receive. Sorry Kermit but very few read your book reviews.

<............ sinister deletia ..............>

I find one of the strangest alleged facts is that some of the police wanted to release Amanda after she admitted to being at the cottage. It just seems wacky in principal and undermines the concerted effort theory of the PLE. If Chicho would oppose keeping AK in custody wouldn't he also have other independent thoughts on the case and be a danger to the conspiracy?

Dangerous? Because of agendas? What's wrong with trying to understand the agenda, so as being able to assess the facts claimed within?

For some reason, it is part of Follain's agenda to be the only book writer, a dangerous guy, to claim that Chiacchiera suggested (opposed may be too strong a word) that Sollecito and Knox be let go for "further observation", rather than having the whole shooting match thrown at them.

The first question is: what part of Follain's agenda does this serve, particularly since it is opposed/counter to the overall thrust of his narrative? The only one I can think of is that it is something Follain can later point to so as to claim objectivity. "See, I'm not just including all the stuff which gets the ILE off the hook for their rush for judgement." The point is: how does it serve the narrative/bias of the author?

This is the kind of danger someone should willingly dive into!

This is even before trying to assess the presumed factuality of what it is alleged Chiacchiera did or didn't say. Everyone has an agenda - you have one I have one.

For that matter it is dangerous to read anything - including early newspaper reports where the outgoing info was tightly controlled.

 

[Briars]

duplicate

 

[Briars]

Ha! That's an example of how the man thinks when he's under attack from people who push him into judicial harms' way.... is it a good way of thinking? Of course not. But it's amazing how people do not consider the overall context.

Ever since Mignini had his blog shut down - an action reminiscent of the Chinese government - and since the cops beat down his door and tried to have him committed - which the attending doctor refused to do....

Frank has been judicially harassed, which is a common theme among some. The facts of these cases don't seem to matter, the point is to harass Frank. Frank is being harassed even about judicial non-events: like Canada!!!!

But at the end of the day - what possible relevance does this have to the coming SC decision? None. It's shooting the messenger simply because someone does not like the message.

The unfortunate numerous comments on IIP were examples of anything goes. Abusive, untruthful but revealing of the source You can shoot the messenger if the message is a hoax. Frank has most likely invented a story about his arrest in Perugia. That persecution has been a big part of the Mignini myth It falls apart just like much of the conspiracy to frame the innocents.

 

[Mary_H]

Briars, Frank's arrest is only a small part of PM Mignini's actions, whereas the most direct sources of information about Mignini's methods are his words and the legal actions he has pursued. I have discussed this at length upthread. I have read a small portion of the IA thread and decided that Frank may be the house guest from **** but that the whole matter was tangential to the case, as RWVBWL has eloquently explained. Charlie Wilkes' comment is succinct and to the point. Frank's credibility as a reporter is dependent on the accuracy of his reports. The same is true of Follain and Nadeau. What do you think about their errors, and do you still find those two reporters credible in spite of them? What did you think of the reports on the Aldrovandi and Misseri cases, as given in the links I provided?

Well, as Charlie said, the controversy swirling around Frank is well suited to the talent and stature of those who find it interesting. Personally, I find this controversy interesting. I guess it must be well suited to my talent and stature.

I find it interesting for two reasons. First, it is new. When I look at the continued, repeated, rehashed, beaten-dead-horse discussions of the five-year-old events of 2007, I am disheartened. Second, at least when it comes to the guilter blogs, I figure that any space that is devoted to bashing Frank is space that is not devoted to bashing Raffaele.

 

[Grinder]

mistake

 

[Briars]

Well, as Charlie said, the controversy swirling around Frank is well suited to the talent and stature of those who find it interesting. Personally, I find this controversy interesting. I guess it must be well suited to my talent and stature.

I find it interesting for two reasons. First, it is new. When I look at the continued, repeated, rehashed, beaten-dead-horse discussions of the five-year-old events of 2007, I am disheartened. Second, at least when it comes to the guilter blogs, I figure that any space that is devoted to bashing Frank is space that is not devoted to bashing Raffaele.

Quite right no bashing of Raffaele but filled with the attack on two former supporters. Yes a nice change, too bad about those that joined in to prop up Frank and all his vile comments. No one else would have gotten away with post after post that Frank did . Why was he the exception and protected? Blame the supporters that kept the interest up.

 

[Grinder]

Bill - Frank was arrested in Hawaii, Perugia and Seattle. He was vague about what happened in Perugia at the time and I would like you to give evidence that it wasn't for another domestic assault rather than something organized by Mignini and the Perugian flying squad as he implied.

The police were summoned to his host's house in Canada.

In the case in Hawaii the victim didn't show at the court hearing and he was released or was it that she said if he left the island she wouldn't pursue the charges?

In the only case that made it to court with victims willing to testify, a bench warrant (arrest warrant) was issued.

So when you state "The strange thing is that whenever actions on this side of the Atlantic have been judged by an impartial court, Frank has always been vindicated. And even if he had not been vindicated, what possible relevance could that have to, say for example, a kitchen knife " it is clearly a red herring and a straw man.

He has never been vindicated i.e. found not guilty. The issue has nothing to do with the knife, but does have something to do with his credibility vis-a-vis the event with Frank in Perugia. Btw, was he convicted by a partial court or did you just throw in the impartial for effect?

So in Canada his host just wanted him out of his house and the police helped. In Hawaii the host wanted off her island and the police helped. In Seattle he was arrested, booked and charged and then he missed a court date resulting in an arrest warrant.

Please explain where he was vindicated?

Perhaps you could also explain why you had to spend hours with the Canadian immigration people top get him in the country. You could but you won't.

 

[Bill Williams]

The unfortunate numerous comments on IIP were examples of anything goes. Abusive, untruthful but revealing of the source You can shoot the messenger if the message is a hoax. Frank has most likely invented a story about his arrest in Perugia. That persecution has been a big part of the Mignini myth It falls apart just like much of the conspiracy to frame the innocents.

So there we have it. Allegations on both sides including some her fiery words from a guy who himself has been condemned on nothing but allegations. At least when one pulls back the curtain on them, you see how they are interconnected with no relevance at at to Perugia, but hell let's continue anyway. On the other hand, Mignini has bigger problems than one minor blogger. He has major authors making allegations againgst him as well as the ones implied in both Massei's and Hellman's motivations report. By comparison it sucks to be Mignini.

The fact that you feel you have to go after Frank in an attempt to defend Mignini from allegations says all that needs to be said.

 

[Grinder]

Dangerous? Because of agendas? What's wrong with trying to understand the agenda, so as being able to assess the facts claimed within?

You truncated by statement. It also included the lack of widespread comments as when an article is printed in real time. Some wrote that Meredith's window was broken, but that was cleared up soon and by many. When Raf says he didn't give up AK's alibi until after she talked and signed or when Follain says that Chiacchiera said this or that there is no forum for meaningful critique.

For some reason, it is part of Follain's agenda to be the only book writer, a dangerous guy, to claim that Chiacchiera suggested (opposed may be too strong a word) that Sollecito and Knox be let go for "further observation", rather than having the whole shooting match thrown at them.

Is it really that hard for you? You said earlier that Chiacchiera wanted to release them which is far different from what you are now saying. There was no reference to Follain being dangerous except by you. The danger is taking these snippets and building a theory.

Follain is served by book sales. Raf is served by being honorable.

 

[Kaosium]

The unfortunate numerous comments on IIP were examples of anything goes. Abusive, untruthful but revealing of the source You can shoot the messenger if the message is a hoax. Frank has most likely invented a story about his arrest in Perugia.

It looked to me more like he was angry, and considering Mignini's other numerous attempts to silence criticism, including having Frank's site shut down by court order, this would hardly be out of character for him.

That persecution has been a big part of the Mignini myth

There's no need for any mythology with Mignini outside the odd ones he believes in and the case he created: we have evidence. The whole case he made is evidence against him as a liar. I'll just start with one simple example: the 'mixed blood.' Not even Massei bought that one, and you can see for yourself how it was collected, and if you have any scientific or logical aptitude at all, e.g. you can competently flush your toilet and not be astonished when the water goes bye-bye, it becomes clear that even attempting to pretend there was ever mixed blood was a lie from the start.

It falls apart just like much of the conspiracy to frame the innocents.

Again, there is every piece of 'evidence' they produced working against them, though in some cases one can argue they were so incompetent they couldn't be corrupt, others perhaps that they were just following orders and doing their jobs, not Mignini (and Stefanoni incidentally) he's pretty much hoisted on his own petard.

At the very beginning he had two 'vague and confused' statements from a girl he and his posse had been working on all night, the worst they amounted to was she was covering her ears in the kitchen when Meredith was killed. There's nothing in Raffaele's statement regarding the murder at all, they got nothing from Patrick. There was no evidence of either Amanda or Raffaele being in the murder room, he had nothing whatsoever indicating anything regarding a ritual orgy-murder/sex game/whatever. So tell me, just where did that come from?

Mignini just made it up and then went looking for 'evidence' to 'support' that contention, the problem for him is that evidence is actually indicative of Amanda and Raffaele's innocence and Mignini and Stefanoni's guilt.

BTW, which story of theirs on not taping the interrogation did you like best? There was them being so busy getting to arrest Patrick (at dawn) they forgot, (Raffaele and Amanda were there all night) there was the one about Napoleoni claiming it came out all sudden like and they weren't prepared, (over the course of ~7 hours) and then there was that they didn't have room in the budget, despite them taping (and transcribing IIRC) on the order of 30k of their messages at a huge cost to the state.

 

[Briars]

So there we have it. Allegations on both sides including some her fiery words from a guy who himself has been condemned on nothing but allegations. At least when one pulls back the curtain on them, you see how they are interconnected with no relevance at at to Perugia, but hell let's continue anyway. On the other hand, Mignini has bigger problems than one minor blogger. He has major authors making allegations againgst him as well as the ones implied in both Massei's and Hellman's motivations report. By comparison it sucks to be Mignini.

The fact that you feel you have to go after Frank in an attempt to defend Mignini from allegations says all that needs to be said.

I like most reasonable people would have a huge issue with Frank's posts and draw some conclusions . Combined with recent events his credibility is in question. It would be foolish of me buy what he has written about his arrest in Perugia in light of his recent behavior and off the wall rants against those that funded him.