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

[Chris_Halkides]

means of verification

Did Mignini talk with them after the 5:45 event without a lawyer present? Are you sure that Mignini was the direct source of those examples?

It would have been enough just to get it in the papers and have them get through the TV or other prisoners.

You raise a good point, and I should have been clearer. In my comment I was personifying ILE in the figure of Mignini, but I am not certain who originated the false stories, and I do not believe Mignini spoke with them directly. It is clear from Amanda's comments that people associated with ILE were speaking with her, although I cannot recall the details. Whether or not the same were true for Raffaele might be answered in Honor Bound, which is not in front of me at the moment. Getting the stories into the media might work as well as direct conversation, maybe even better. My point is that when someone lacks the ability to check information directly (and who has not yet learned to discount whatever LE says) is in a vulnerable position while incarcerated. A lawyer who was in constant contact with them could remind them to say nothing to ILE. While they were incarcerated, they were more likely to say things that would hurt their case.

 

[Bill Williams]

There are a number of interesting points in this case so far. However, this quote from the BBC best sums up why Pistoris is out on bail [OUOTE]It's probably fair to assume that the prosecution team never expected to win the argument against bail. Instead their strategy was to force Oscar Pistorius to show his hand, giving a full account of his version of events in order to counter the premeditated murder charge raised at the bail hearing.

The full article is http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21554329.

As for the comments from the Steenkamp and the Pistorius families try this link http://news.sky.com/story/1055996/pistorius-oscar-will-never-be-the-same .

Thanks for the links.

So, without taking this too far off thread.... the point really is that there is always a war going on between prosecution and defence in early tactical advantages.

It just highlights that Mignini wanted both Sollecito and Knox well locked away, well before they even had access to a lawyer. They saw their first lawyer moments before the hearing with Matteini that put the two in precautionary detention for a year.

So that was the state of things, both kids locked away for up to a year, with no representation. The thing which hit me in the CNN piece on Pistorius was the unanimous remarks of the lawyers present how huge that is.

Without legal representation, Matteini was able to get it on the record that the knife seized from Raffaele (note: not the one from his kitchen in the apartment) was the murder weapon, this even before the first DNA testing came in from Stefanoni about the kitchen knife; much less challenge from a competent defence attorney.

Matteini also said Raffaele's footprint was found in Meredith's room, a finding later found to be false.

She also said that Knox let the two men in with her keys, with nothing other than speculation as her guide, and no forensics about the break-in to back up if it was a staged break-in or not.

Sollecito's lawyer, once he was on the scene, said he would appeal Matteini's decision to hold them in custody for up to a year, but by that time the tactical damage is done. Things get onto the record without challenge.... even things like Raffaele's personal knife eventually are withdrawn from the prosecution's case...

.... but the point being, it is a tactical war which Mignini waged, and he dealt his cards from the bottom of the deck.

 

[Grinder]

My point is that when someone lacks the ability to check information directly (and who has not yet learned to discount whatever LE says) is in a vulnerable position while incarcerated.

Of course, there is no debate there. I just didn't remember the details of who it was.

Sitting in jail makes the mind play tricks as well. I've always thought that the pricked Meredith was a result of a Pooh Bear "think, think, think" episode. It is a form of torture.

Interestingly the young man that killed his roommate in Rome was given "bail". It seems that if there is no doubt of having committed the act, then release isn't a problem

 

[Chris_Halkides]

heard it from a friend

Of course, there is no debate there. I just didn't remember the details of who it was.

Sitting in jail makes the mind play tricks as well. I've always thought that the pricked Meredith was a result of a Pooh Bear "think, think, think" episode. It is a form of torture.

Interestingly the young man that killed his roommate in Rome was given "bail". It seems that if there is no doubt of having committed the act, then release isn't a problem

In the case of the laundromat story, Raffaele apparently heard that rumor through his family. Are you thinking of Reid Schepis? I believe that the young man who was attacked survived the stabbing. Can you elaborate on pooh bear?

 

[Grinder]

In the case of the laundromat story, Raffaele apparently heard that rumor through his family. Are you thinking of Reid Schepis? I believe that the young man who was attacked survived the stabbing. Can you elaborate on pooh bear?

Yes, he did survive but it was a vicious attack and Schepis was out in days.

Pooh Bear would walk around trying to remember something and would say out loud "think, think, think" and I can imagine that an innocent person confronted with something like the DNA on the knife would act in a similar way trying to make sense of it.

There is no doubt that any prosecutor would prefer to have the defendant incarcerated for many reasons. If nothing else, they couldn't work for their own defense as lay detectives.

 

[anglolawyer]

Are you reading that with a comma?

ETA - or a period after Dead?

Dead? Riiiiiight!!!!

 

[RandyN]

Migninis lunch mate Claudia Matteini is as crooked as he is. She as much says that jail is necessary because the mother is coming. Lawyers have been denied access to their clients (another reason ECHR charges Italy with violations against right to a fair trial) with Mignini using some obscure hitch in the law designed to keep mafia dons from killing all the witnesses before they reach the prelim...

Perhaps the Italian system writes up well as a philosophy but the corrupt nature that seems to be built into the culture ...for example they expect a defendant to lie and have no issues with that... make their system the worst! At least according to the human rights violations committed by Italys judicial system charged by the ECOHR.

And yes the family of RS solved the wrong amount of shoe rings puzzle. And if you investigate the timing of that little revelation you will then cross link an odd and spectacular return to the crime scene in full bunny suit... cameras rolling...somewheres around Dec 18, 2007. It like the very next day or so....

These clowns never expected anyone to be watching let alone putting these oddly timed and fantastic exploration extravaganzas together. (recall the shoe print goes away = RS must be released as nothing else connects him) And so we get production the number I like to call dancing with mops...with Act 2, scene 3 the aha moment of finding the bra clasp! Why it was as if they could see his DNA on it with their bare eyes...let me touch it ,,,no let me ...no me...opps dropped it or maybe placed it down...here there anywhere.

Just one of many clown acts put on by this Italian circus. Scandalous...and they still seek to lie and find ten who will swear to it.

Mignini has filed a complaint against RS for slandering his good name. HA! What a joke of a man. And Italy by failing to take action against him makes them a joke of a country. Amanda was truly lucky to get out of there alive.

 

[JREF2010]

Randy I agree. Migninni is just sue happy and apparently has a vicious ego.
In some ways the system works, the appeals are a given, for example.
In other views of the system, people like Migninni and Napoleanoi and Matteini just never get the discipline right or they become inbred to a point one ends up like Stefonani and pretty much just lying in front of the court, and nothing happened to her either.

As it nears March, it still seems there is this awkward unfilmed interrogation where she "crumbled" as the polizia stated. ..and a bunch of sketchy DNA evidence that was allowed to mold, or worse a murder weapon that wasnt even tested thoroughly for 4yrs.

a case built on starch dna?

 

[RandyN]

Randy I agree. Migninni is just sue happy and apparently has a vicious ego.
In some ways the system works, the appeals are a given, for example.
In other views of the system, people like Migninni and Napoleanoi and Matteini just never get the discipline right or they become inbred to a point one ends up like Stefonani and pretty much just lying in front of the court, and nothing happened to her either.

As it nears March, it still seems there is this awkward unfilmed interrogation where she "crumbled" as the polizia stated. ..and a bunch of sketchy DNA evidence that was allowed to mold, or worse a murder weapon that wasnt even tested thoroughly for 4yrs.
a case built on starch dna?

I didnt realize the prosecution ever had a "murder weapon".

It certainly could not have been the knife the prosecution presented in court. It remains beyond me why the defense didnt attack everyone related to that most unlikely of murder weapons. The police? Shred the idiot who claimed to have chosen this knife based on his "intuition". The knife was not compatible with most of the wounds...which has to mean at least another knife...so where is it and who used it? The knife the prosecution presented didn't come close to matching a blood outlined knife print on the bed cover...ahhhh

But just so happens that the DNA "expert" forgot her notes during the prelim and so she lied and said there was ample DNA of the victim found on this most unlikely of "murder weapons"...and when we later find out about this lie...what happens? Nothing! The defense doesn't rise and point out the suspicious claim about the quantity of DNA found there. Why? Why not suggest Stefanoni was lying? Why not point out to her, on the stand, that the knife didn't match the wounds? Didn't match the blood print?

That in fact it was a bread knife randomly selected and for which it never made sense for it to be in court in the first place...let alone her propping it up with bad undocumented "science"? Where were the defenses? Maybe sitting on their hands frozen in fear of having charges brought against them for pointing out the obvious? Much as Knox did for simply telling the truth about being hit by police. Note that the cowards ....and I'm picking on the defense now...were afraid to buttress Knoxs truth about being abused by police.

I swore watching the first trial that the defense was sandbagging to drag out this ridiculous case simply for additional fees necessary in an appeal trial.
Sub-lawyers calling Knox "lucerfina"...WTF? Judge? Nothing. Defense? Nothing. What you think Mignini will object? No.

If Italian Courts are operated no better than the example we witnessed in Perugia then Italy is in deep doodoo. That first trial was indeed outrageous. And they tried their best to make the appeal trial almost as bad. Prosecutors actually threatening a witness on the stand. Comodi ...twice trying to sneak false control data sheets into the court file...and both times she is caught by the judges and what happens to her? Nothing. In fact she retreats outside and complains to the press that the case is lost...the judges are against the prosecutors. And when the reporter publishes that...what? Nothing. No charges brought against Comodi for disrespecting the court.

Stefanoni refuses twice the judges orders for her to turn over all her records to the independent DNA experts. Hellmann gently prods her once...and she refuses...then he is a little firmer...and she maybe does it but only on the day the expert report is due...and it remains unclear still if she ever in fact turned over all the EDF's. And the result of this mockery of the court? Nothing.

No Italy runs its courts like the mafia runs its business. Same moral compass. Same level of integrity. The court allows itself to be mocked and made a joke of when they demand such low standards from their own officers.

One needs only examine the web site of the European Court Of Human Rights and skim the countries with the most abusive courts...Italy is at or very near the top of the worst violators. There is nothing redeeming about their courts or system. It is a joke. Not just my opinion but the European Court Of Human Rights opinion as well.

 

[anglolawyer]

IIRC the EDFs for the negative controls on the knife (kinda crucial dontcha think?) were not produced. I base that on C-V and may try to find the reference if a spare hour presents itself (I hate navigating that document).

 

[anglolawyer]

Those EDFs - the facts

This is from Kompo's and Katy_did's translation of C-V

The electropherogram relating to the electrophoretic run of the amplified DNA from sample A (knife handle), attached to the RTIGF, is shown below:

On 29 April 2011, the electropherogram relating to the electrophoretic run of the amplified DNA from sample A was sent to us on CD-rom, on which the heights of the allele peaks are indicated:

And on 11 May 2011, the electropherogram relating to the electrophoretic run of the amplified DNA from sample A was sent to us via e-mail, on which the heights and areas of the peaks are indicated:

On 29 April, the electropherograms relating to the two electrophoretic runs of the amplified DNA from sample B were sent to us on CD-ROM, on which the allele peak heights are indicated (electropherograms dated respectively Run 1: Sept. 23 2008, 10:35 AM; Run 2: Sept. 25 2008, 01:17 PM).

On 11 May 2011, the electropherograms relating to the above runs were sent to us via e-mail, but with the peak heights and areas indicated; these are shown below.


In addition, it must be noted that neither the negative control – which, as previously mentioned, could have indicated the presence of possible contamination – nor the positive control, which would have allowed the effectiveness of the selected experimental conditions to be monitored, are present in the electropherograms produced.


Therefore we repeat that the theories formulated by the Technical Consultant about the nature of the material removed from Exhibit 36 are wholly arbitrary in that they are not supported by any objective confirmation.

- It should be stressed that the documentation in the case file relating to the traceability of the analytical operations performed is completely inadequate.

d) employment of negative controls in the amplification procedure to check for the presence of contamination. In the attached eletropherograms, neither negative nor positive controls are reported.

Sample A is the knife handle (Knox) and sample B the blade (Kercher). If EDFs for the controls had been supplied I assume C-V could have analysed the data without necessarily requiring the e-gram, which is a product of the data. Hopefully a techie will put me straight.

 

[RoseMontague]

This is from Kompo's and Katy_did's translation of C-V


Sample A is the knife handle (Knox) and sample B the blade (Kercher). If EDFs for the controls had been supplied I assume C-V could have analysed the data without necessarily requiring the e-gram, which is a product of the data. Hopefully a techie will put me straight.

IIRC, at the appeal the prosecution attempted to say the controls were present in the case file, but nobody could find them, then presented one that had a problem with dates and sample numbers that was obviously bogus, then said wait we found them in a garage somewhere. At this point Hellmann put a stop to the madness from what I remember and did not allow them to present this suddenly found evidence.

 

[Bill Williams]

I didnt realize the prosecution ever had a "murder weapon".

It certainly could not have been the knife the prosecution presented in court. It remains beyond me why the defense didnt attack everyone related to that most unlikely of murder weapons. The police? Shred the idiot who claimed to have chosen this knife based on his "intuition". The knife was not compatible with most of the wounds...which has to mean at least another knife...so where is it and who used it? The knife the prosecution presented didn't come close to matching a blood outlined knife print on the bed cover...ahhhh

But just so happens that the DNA "expert" forgot her notes during the prelim and so she lied and said there was ample DNA of the victim found on this most unlikely of "murder weapons"...and when we later find out about this lie...what happens? Nothing!

The only remaining possibility is that at the time of the collection of the kitchen knife, they had never intended it to make a courtroom. Raffaele in "Honor Bound" relates how they chose the knife in his presence, when they took him back to the apartment on the morning of the 6th.

For my money, at the time all this was related to wanting to show Raffaele how far they were willing to go to involve in him a crime that he could not have possibly participated in. (No wonder he became the forgotten man at trial!)

But these thoughts still don't explain why: if they were going to frame him with some random knife which fit nothing to do with the crime.... why didn't the ILE frame Raffaele with the knife he brought with hi to the Questura? Why not just get Stefanoni to do the shoddy work on that pocket knife, one which at least was possible.....

It is an enduring mystery of the case. If they really were doing a frame up, why not at the very least choose bits of evidence where one doesn't even need to conjure up complicated, improbably backstories, like Massei eventually had to do with the kitchen knife? (Eg. Knox carrying it for protection!)

If this was a frame-up, it was the amateur hour of frame ups. But what other explanation can there be?

 

[anglolawyer]

The only remaining possibility is that at the time of the collection of the kitchen knife, they had never intended it to make a courtroom. Raffaele in "Honor Bound" relates how they chose the knife in his presence, when they took him back to the apartment on the morning of the 6th.

For my money, at the time all this was related to wanting to show Raffaele how far they were willing to go to involve in him a crime that he could not have possibly participated in. (No wonder he became the forgotten man at trial!)

But these thoughts still don't explain why: if they were going to frame him with some random knife which fit nothing to do with the crime.... why didn't the ILE frame Raffaele with the knife he brought with hi to the Questura? Why not just get Stefanoni to do the shoddy work on that pocket knife, one which at least was possible.....

It is an enduring mystery of the case. If they really were doing a frame up, why not at the very least choose bits of evidence where one doesn't even need to conjure up complicated, improbably backstories, like Massei eventually had to do with the kitchen knife? (Eg. Knox carrying it for protection!)

If this was a frame-up, it was the amateur hour of frame ups. But what other explanation can there be?

It should be remembered that it was Amanda's DNA that was found on the knife handle, not Raffaele's. His apartment, her DNA. So it sort of nailed them both. They were going to get him with the Nike print until someone had the totally off-the-wall idea of counting rings.

 

[codyjuneau]

It should be remembered that it was Amanda's DNA that was found on the knife handle, not Raffaele's. His apartment, her DNA. So it sort of nailed them both. They were going to get him with the Nike print until someone had the totally off-the-wall idea of counting rings.

That makes it perfect for their purpose. Raf can clear himself by admitting that Amanda took it from his apartment when she snuck out. Then they pat him on the head and say 'Good boy Raf, good boy. You can go home now'.

 

[codyjuneau]

The antithesis of justice.

Systematically remove the accused person's ability to defend themselves.

Deny lawyers, don't record interrogations, don't advise suspects of their rights, charge them with a crime if they report abuses, lock them in jail without lawyers, intimidate their lawyers, intimidate their families, intimidate reporters, shut down blogs, manipulate the press, leak false reports to the press, intimidate expert witnesses in court (Commodi's threat to C&V), intimidate witnesses out of court (sending 8 cops to Rome to demand a CD from C&V), withhold or destroy exculpatory evidence. The list just goes on and on. Apparently they even threatened to take away the Knox family's telephone calling privileges to Amanda if the Knox's said anything the prosecution did not approve of.

Systematically remove the accused person's ability to defend themselves!

The antithesis of modern justice. Alive and well in Perugia.

 

[Antony]

The only remaining possibility is that at the time of the collection of the kitchen knife, they had never intended it to make a courtroom. Raffaele in "Honor Bound" relates how they chose the knife in his presence, when they took him back to the apartment on the morning of the 6th.

For my money, at the time all this was related to wanting to show Raffaele how far they were willing to go to involve in him a crime that he could not have possibly participated in. (No wonder he became the forgotten man at trial!)

But these thoughts still don't explain why: if they were going to frame him with some random knife which fit nothing to do with the crime.... why didn't the ILE frame Raffaele with the knife he brought with hi to the Questura? Why not just get Stefanoni to do the shoddy work on that pocket knife, one which at least was possible.....

It is an enduring mystery of the case. If they really were doing a frame up, why not at the very least choose bits of evidence where one doesn't even need to conjure up complicated, improbably backstories, like Massei eventually had to do with the kitchen knife? (Eg. Knox carrying it for protection!)

If this was a frame-up, it was the amateur hour of frame ups. But what other explanation can there be?

Yes, that's my reaction as well. The only way to make sense of it is that the prosecution never believed that anything they did would be subjected to scrutiny of any kind. Witness the 2nd conjuring trick, in which they allowed themselves to be filmed "finding" the bra clasp, clearly demonstrating that they knew what its significance would be, before it was ever tested!

Their arrogance and naivety is quite breathtaking.

 

[Grinder]

The only remaining possibility is that at the time of the collection of the kitchen knife, they had never intended it to make a courtroom. Raffaele in "Honor Bound" relates how they chose the knife in his presence, when they took him back to the apartment on the morning of the 6th.

For my money, at the time all this was related to wanting to show Raffaele how far they were willing to go to involve in him a crime that he could not have possibly participated in. (No wonder he became the forgotten man at trial!)

But these thoughts still don't explain why: if they were going to frame him with some random knife which fit nothing to do with the crime.... why didn't the ILE frame Raffaele with the knife he brought with hi to the Questura? Why not just get Stefanoni to do the shoddy work on that pocket knife, one which at least was possible.....

It is an enduring mystery of the case. If they really were doing a frame up, why not at the very least choose bits of evidence where one doesn't even need to conjure up complicated, improbably backstories, like Massei eventually had to do with the kitchen knife? (Eg. Knox carrying it for protection!)

If this was a frame-up, it was the amateur hour of frame ups. But what other explanation can there be?

In general Bill I agree with this

My general criticism is only that you give them too much credit. I don't believe the frame up started quite this early nor do I believe that they had the idea that they would put AK's DNA on the handle and not Raf's

I've always wondered why Raf's DNA missing from the knife wasn't a bigger issue. I'm pretty sure all my knives have some of my DNA on them since I don't scrub the handles or bleach them. He had lived with this kitchen knife for months.

I think the "framing" and other questionable tactics developed a little later in the process. Although I don't rule out the placement of DNA on the bra clasp, the actual video was done for the defense to be able to view the collection, so the drama of it was being watched in real time. I very much doubt that those collecting on that day knew of any underhanded dealings. Someone would have leaked the truth by now if enough people knew the truth.

The big mystery is why they didn't pick all the knives that matched the outline and wounds and why, if planted. they didn't pick a knife that matched the known evidence. If I were Anglo I would say that proves the message was erased that they didn't frame at this time but rather were buffoons.

I will vote for incompetence over plotting, certainly in the early days. Stefanoni is also mostly incompetent but later tried to cover by holding back info - they used the fact that the defense didn't watch the testing as a reason they didn't have the right to question - if that's at valid in Italy it's bogus.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Okay a question to anyone who cares to answer; apart from the obvious comfort you all get from agreeing with each other. Mignini still remains free and in position so what have the exchanges for the past 4 years actually achieved?

 

[Bill Williams]

Okay a question to anyone who cares to answer; apart from the obvious comfort you all get from agreeing with each other. Mignini still remains free and in position so what have the exchanges for the past 4 years actually achieved?

You may not have been paying attention.... but I cannot decide which gives me the greater discomfort:

- disagreeing with Grinder, or
- agreeing with Grinder.​

Otherwise, CoulsdonUK, what I agree with you about is that after 25 March it will be a whole new ballgame and the rubber will then hit the road. And I mean that both ways, and not really anticipating what March 25 will bring. I cannot for the life of me think what a new set of prosecutors (perhaps in Florence, given the way the other satellite prosecutions have gone) will do with the case that lands in their lap if the SC refers it back to the appeals' level.