Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[RandyN]

In some cases, yes. But in this case, there was no interrogation. There was a spontaneous statement.

Typed by police in Italian. Why does Fiqurea hit Knox then? She didn't like the spontaneity or the statement?

Both intellectually dishonest and completely illogical.

 

[RandyN]

Sorry, but what makes you think that I did not make a complaint?

The level of noise coming from my BS meter tells me that you did not make a complaint.

 

[codyjuneau]

I meant to say that Mignini was in Profazio's room (with Giobbi, too). Check it out:

From summary of Giobbi testimony:

The Perugian police boasted of how nicely they treated Amanda. They gave her cake and camomile, etc. Giobbi wasn't in the interview rooms, instead hiding in the director's room. He testified that he could hear Amanda screaming, something not mentioned by the chamomile bearing Perugian police. http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/201...-confirms.html


Mignini interview by CNN:
11’03’’ CNN: No one hit her?11’06’’ Mignini: No, look, absolutely not. I can state this in the most positive way, and then, let’s say… I wasn’t there when she was being questioned by police, the rooms are quite far away… you don’t know but I was… it’s quite far, there’s a corridor, and I was with the director, Dr. Porfazio, and she was being questioned in a different place. I also remember that passing through, I also saw Sollecito who was alone in a different room; he was also being questioned, as I recall. I don’t exclude…well…it’s clear that I wasn’t there, but I don’t believe that anything whatsoever happened, and in my presence absolutely not.

.
'No, look, absolutely not. I can state this in the most positive way'
Migi categorically denies anyone hit Amanda.

'I wasn’t there when she was being questioned by police'
Ergo, Migi could not know if anyone hit Amanda or not.

'I don’t exclude…well…'
Migi almost slipped up and admitted Amanda could have been hit. Close call, that sure would screw up the defamation suit.

'it’s clear that I wasn’t there, but I don’t believe that anything whatsoever happened'
Mignini now realizes he should not have denied Amanda was hit, since he could not know that. Hence, he back tracks and says he 'believes' that Amanda was not hit.
.

 

[RWVBWL]

Good point CodyJuneau!

'I don’t exclude…well…'Migi almost slipped up and admitted Amanda could have been hit. Close call, that sure would screw up the defamation suit.

'it’s clear that I wasn’t there, but I don’t believe that anything whatsoever happened'
Mignini now realizes he should not have denied Amanda was hit, since he could not know that. Hence, he back tracks and says he 'believes' that Amanda was not hit.

 

[RandyN]

Mignini never said they "didn't record the 5:45AM interrogation because of budget". He said the police didn't record the interrogation (01:45 interrogation) because they just don't do that because of budget.
Then he said that HE didn't record Knox statement (the 05:45 sponteneous statement, the one she delivered to him) because of confusion due to the hurry to arrest Lumumba, and they didn't think about it.

Amanda's versions are simply divergent. It's not about being "honest", that would be a subjective perception, it's about being compatible between each other. They are inconsistent among each other, they are not compatible. And they are given in court not to a journalist during an informal chat. And she is the suspect in a murder trial, Mignini is not a suspect just a chap talking to entartain another chap, he doesn't actually need to answer to anyone's question.

The SC and you both said her versions are not to be considered. You say because the first can never be used against the person giving it and the second because no defense was allowed. And forget trying to lump the gift in as well. That would be no different than the second 5:45 AM concoction. The law is clear. A defendant CAN NOT give up or waive the attorney provision.

So you are talking about nothing. You and Massei are wrong to do so. Mignini is a provable liar just for this reason alone.

If a prosecutor has a strong case backed by solid facts they never resort to the vast number of tricks as we see in this case. Why deny lawyers until the morning of the hearing? Honest prosecutors simply do not do that...there is no need. But Mignini does it.

Just as Mignini who forgets to press record...sure right...acts as only a notary and simply takes notes as Knox speaks...even though he of all should clearly understand that it is impossible for Knox to waive this right and so it makes Mignini doubly fake and corrupt. She cant legally make a spontaneous statement...at least not one that can be used in court against her...this is clear. Cant you understand the logic of this obvious trick? Honest prosecutors don't need to do this.

 

[RandyN]

Oh come on Mach, they were recording her in the waiting room. What budget allows money for recording 10,000 phone calls and recording people in waiting rooms and can't record one in the interrogation room. Seriously, do you expect anyone in their right mind to believe that?

The actual number...as hard as it is to believe is thirty thousand plus (30,000 +) wire tapped phone calls...not 10 thousand.

 

[RandyN]

I watched the UK interview with Amanda.

What's striking is that there's still no acknowledgement whatsoever of the actions by Giuliano Mignini and other Italian officials in obtaining the "confession", arrest and ultimately conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. I don't mean very little, but absolutely none, not even implicit. Questions are still put to Amanda about the "confession" as if it were obtained via entirely legitimate means, as if Amanda is the ONLY one who has any explaining to do. Which is to say, the Italian authorities are still pussy-footed around.

Christianahannah slyly asked if there is any "documentation" concerning criminality on Mignini's part. There's plenty of it, of course.

But I suspect she was trying to draw people into a discusion about indictments. She needs to be reminded that Mignini already has a conviction for abuse of office, for which he was never acquitted - an appeal court simply annulled it on the basis that the convicting court had "no jurisdiction". The old boy network apprently decided that a "wrist-slap" for him sufficed. Naughty Mignini.

It would seem that there is an implicit understanding amongst MSM reporters and journalists that, failing Italian law-enforcement taking action agaisnt its own, the latter's "authority" is not to be disparaged or undermined in any way.

Which leaves Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito at the mercy of the reprobates and slanderers who can continue their nasty little campaign with the appearance of endorsement by "authority", without which such cowards wouldn't DARE behave as they do.

This was exactly my point although I did not express it as well as you.

And also my deal is not to judge Amanda for anything she says or does ...I understand that she is in constant jeopardy and may be harmed for what she may or may not say.

That said...come on. Where is her American lawyer asking these probative questions on TV or to the press? How deep is one expected to allow and ignore the prosecution and police to stack the BS before calling them out for it?

Ahhh geee well there is still that accusing the innocent black guy thing. Plus all those lies...plus your freely given spontaneous statements (funny how one gets slapped around when giving theses free statements and while holding onto tea and cake! Well sure that sounds logical.

Miss Knox is getting better...far better... She says that what the prosecutor says about me is not true. That the police have it all wrong, etc...

But she needs a mouth asking the real questions. Not someone cowered in fear like her Italian lawyers. Someone to point out the glaring inconsistencies and highly suspicious behavior of the police and prosecutor in this case.

Her "confession" is not a confession at all and yet she is still asked about it regularly and no one asks about her being hit during the interrogation and if the fact that the tape is missing may be related to that abuse? And if in fact the prosecutor hid the tape because he illegally questioned her without her lawyer and further he denied her access to a lawyer for days longer until her first hearing and now we have a clown here telling us that that is the law????

And in 6 years no one ever calls BS! No one puts the case against a rotten prosecution together...the ruined computers, the missing tape, the scream in the questura, the action of using the Guede trial to convict persons not participating in the trial...the Mignini lies, the Stefanoni lies in court. The fact that Biondo is a prosecution consultant in any sane court would be a severe conflict of interest and no real judge would allow such impropriety to even be suggested by the obvious conflict. Hundreds more things that make you say huh???

Mignini filing sub-cases against dozens who dont fall into his conga line. Easily provable and highly questionable activity by a court officer. Silencing a free press is something Italy can sorely afford to be without. If not the press then who is the watchdog against abuse? The police? HA! The judiciary? HAHA! The politicians? HAHAHA! Ask the former PM how that worked out for him.

But no...Matt Laurer is not asking AK lawyer why he thinks Mignini is responsible for so many seeming irregularities if the case he has is so solid. Why 3,4 5 and then no motive? Why give interviews where he speculates that Knox may have orchestrated the murder from the hallway? And that's not the problem here...the problem is that no one calls him out on the carpet for any of it. That is absurd. At this point why no story that this is the guy who arrested 20 or more people because he felt some dead guys pants didn't fit quite right after being buried for some years. And the nightmare he put these people thru with his wild crazy imaginings? Imagine the cost to defend against this mad man? And now he uses Knox to cover his mistakes in Narduci and somehow mainstream media misses this whole damn sad crazy affair? How? Why no Matt Lauer questions about this insanity?

Certainly a panel of respectable professionals could be put together starting with Doug Prestion telling his and Marios tale...then moving on to the bad science, the suspicious leaks, the inhuman fake HIV result, detention based on false evidence, the rush to judgement...and a hundred more highly questionable and likely corrupt actions taken against innocent wrongly accused people...like no evidence...no CCTV...pretend witnesses...a crazy TOD...DNA evidence too low to measure...5 picograms could be zero picograms...no way to tell. Plus the evidence is purposely destroyed or incompetently destroyed...take your pick. Who stores metal in a liquid? Better if she had tossed it on the top shelf of the coat closet...the DNA would still be there...but that is not how they do things in this case...better to have missing data and missing evidence...and dead super witnesses, and inadmissible statements that somehow make their way into every single trial so far and even the SC decision which originally banned them?

And yet no news reports or investigations of this insanity...Amanda is still forced to explain the confession, the accusation, etc... its just too much pedantic BS for me...

I never meant to suggest that Knox should know how to handle all this...I do suggest that some amount of professional help in the form of a mouth like Jerry Spence (is he still alive?) might be in order...or where is the Ted guy?

The often repeated quote must be run out once more...All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men (and women) to do nothing.

 

[Antony]

She should pay up she was convicted of the crime and served 3 years Patik lost he business and suffered the humiliation of being jailed. Amanda and her mother kept quiet for 2 weeks or more. Funny how Patrik should pay in your little world. The blindness towards what he suffered is a glimpse how you twist everything for Amanda.

No-one is "blind" to Patrick's suffering - what we are saying is the the responsibility for it lies entirely with the Perugia police and Mignini: the false imprisonment, the beating and abuse, and the illegal deprivation of livelihood resulting from keeping his bar closed for 6 months afterwards.

They (not Amanda) arrested him on the pretext of illegally obtained statements that reflected their own scenario of the crime. Amanda's signature on illegally obtained statements, typed for her by others is not proof of her accusation.

This entire circus of iterated legal processes stems from their agenda of covering up the fact that they illegally arrested 3 innocent people. The fact that people like you can't see this (yes, out of blindness) merely shows that you are part of the problem.

ETA: not only do you not see the odious prosecution agenda for what it is; you go on supporting it after 6 years, against all facts, reason and morality. That is shameful.

 

[anglolawyer]

Good point CodyJuneau!

'I don’t exclude…well…'Migi almost slipped up and admitted Amanda could have been hit. Close call, that sure would screw up the defamation suit.

'it’s clear that I wasn’t there, but I don’t believe that anything whatsoever happened'
Mignini now realizes he should not have denied Amanda was hit, since he could not know that. Hence, he back tracks and says he 'believes' that Amanda was not hit.

Imagine putting this clown on the stand. That would be fun. Mach can represent him.

 

[JREF2010]

In a Sex Game Gone Wrong,
Why is only Rudy Guede's DNA inside Meredith?
Why is there no DNA of Raffaele anywhere on or inside Miss Kercher?

Or on her clothing?

You'll probably argue, wait, RW,
there is a bra-clasp with Raff's DNA on it.

Question: that Bra-clasp has other male DNA on it besides Raffaele, correct? Does the sample containing the DNA of Rudy Guede on Meredith's clothing also show other male DNA contributers too??

that's an interesting question, but how will anyone ever know?

when there is dishonest lab work done by an obstinate pro-prosecution Stefonani, can we ever know?

sometimes she magnifys peaks under 50rfu, sometimes she excludes them sometimes she counts the peaks sometimes she ignores them...as long as she falsely creates evidence that supported the Migninni and his SS then it was included.

and we're talking about dishonest detective work, supposedly not checking the semen stain on a pillow, that was in the murder scene of a rape/murder....please, not many are stupid enough to trust this group lying squad Perugian phonys...

after all this time its like listening to a liar speak, whats the point.

it has to come from a independent expert, hopefully the Florence trial will call in C&V and maybe even a 3rd review to bring Stephoni into the spotlight and show her for the cockroach she is.

 

[Diocletus]

Question: that Bra-clasp has other male DNA on it besides Raffaele, correct? Does the sample containing the DNA of Rudy Guede on Meredith's clothing also show other male DNA contributers too?
Or is it only Raffaele's sample found on that bra-clasp collected 47 days later that has other male contributers?

Hey, Diocletus,
can you check on that?

I haven't looked at all of the Rudy profiles yet. But I can tell you this now: there are two samples from the bra, 59b and 59g, that went through electrophoresis but the egrams have been suppressed. I believe that the reason that they are suppressed is because they would show uninterpretable mixtures of DNA. In other words, the bra would appear to be contaminated.

Wouldn't that be inconvenient?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

worth thinking about very carefully

Question: that Bra-clasp has other male DNA on it besides Raffaele, correct? Does the sample containing the DNA of Rudy Guede on Meredith's clothing also show other male DNA contributers too?
Or is it only Raffaele's sample found on that bra-clasp collected 47 days later that has other male contributers?

These are among the best questions that have been asked here in a long time. I'll see what I can do.

 

[Diocletus]

These are among the best questions that have been asked here in a long time. I'll see what I can do.

If you go to the back of Stefanoni's lab report, you will find an index of all of the Rudy egrams. You can look up the individual sample entries in the report and then find the serial numbers for the egrams, which you can cross-reference to easily find the egrams in the "Egram" package.

 

[Machiavelli]

The SC and you both said her versions are not to be considered. You say because the first can never be used against the person giving it and the second because no defense was allowed. And forget trying to lump the gift in as well. (...)

I am talking in the first place about the inconsistencies between her versions of Dec. 17 (fully usable) and her 2009 testimony (fully usable). And between her overal trial position (false memory syndrome, no claim of coercion or claim of illegal interogation) and her book (on principle fully usable).

Moreover, even her 01:45 and 05:45 statements are usable. The 01:45 interrogation is just usable against others, hence it is usable indirectly. The 05:45 interrogation is not usable in the charge of murder but it was usable in the charge of calunna. The charge of calunnia itself - Massei and the SC ruled - is usable in the charge of murder so even the 05:45 is in fact indirectly usable.
Moreover, the hand written memoirs are fully usable (what is described there - what there is, and what there is not) are to be used to assess her consistency.

 

[Diocletus]

I am talking in the first place about the inconsistencies between her versions of Dec. 17 (fully usable) and her 2009 testimony (fully usable). And between her overal trial position (false memory syndrome, no claim of coercion or claim of illegal interogation) and her book (on principle fully usable).

Moreover, even her 01:45 and 05:45 statements are usable. The 01:45 interrogation is just usable against others, hence it is usable indirectly. The 05:45 interrogation is not usable in the charge of murder but it was usable in the charge of calunna. The charge of calunnia itself - Massei and the SC ruled - is usable in the charge of murder so even the 05:45 is in fact indirectly usable.
Moreover, the hand written memoirs are fully usable (what is described there - what there is, and what there is not) are to be used to assess her consistency.

Is the screaming part usable, too?

 

[Machiavelli]

Typed by police in Italian. Why does Fiqurea hit Knox then? She didn't like the spontaneity or the statement?

That (alleged episode) was during the interrogation which ended at 01:45.

The spontaneous statement begun hours later; after he had chamomille tee and pastries, after she was drowsy for a long while squatting in the room and she "lost perception about time". After that while, she was kind of woken or called up again (Anna Donnino testimony) she spoke with Mignini (whom she met for the first time) who told her about her rights, and then she decided to release the spontaneous statement.

This reconstruction of events was undisputed.

 

[Machiavelli]

Is the screaming part usable, too?

Your inventions are not usable. If Giobbi's said things in a testimony, his statments are usable and I assume that if they were meaningful to something they were used.
Apart from that there was nothing that made Knox credible when she claimed a false memory syndrome, or when she claimed that she accused Patrick because "it could be true"; or when she changed versions about the interrogation and sms text. And as - over the whole trial - she never provided any description nor complaint nor claim about any alleged illegal 05:45 interogation nor any factual descritpion of coercion.
Nor any convincting explanation for her placing false evidence again - and offering again false testimonies - in her hand written memoirs.

 

[Machiavelli]

There is no such thing as a definitive conviction in Italy.

If there is then please explain the case from year 2000 in which Hellmann was part of a 3 judge panel that overturned a murder conviction that had passed even the SC.

I will lable this comment as racist. Like sever others of yours.
The Italian law acknowledges the existence of definitive convictions.
A definitive conviction in Italy is always potentially subject to discussion just like it is a definitive conviction in the US, but this happens only if there is new glaring new evidence enough to obtain a re-trial from the SC - very rare (exactly like it happens with definitive convitions in the US).

(...)Knox never blamed Lumumba (...snip)

So you are saying Knox is not sorry with Lumumba. You can say that quickly.

 

[Machiavelli]

Did someone whisper to you that you'd made a mistake? (..)

No. Because I corrected my statement before anyone came to whisper and before I could know what the actual "truth" was; I did that even immediately, on my own decision, in a second post - I immediately clarified that I do not have information about the detail (it is something that I remember having heared but I never actually investigated). So it's quite the contrary. It's something which you certainly don't do. I always correct myself when I have doubts or when I don't have sources. This immediate correction should prove you that I'm honest and truthful in all my statements, and that I always specify what I know. You are unable to acknowledge even this obvious fact. But above all, you are unable to do that yourself. You cling to your false ideas and false unproven and unreasonable claims.

 

[Machiavelli]

Well if this violates no codes or articles then it is untrue that Italy requires defendants to be provided lawyers ever... no mater the name and status the police wish to make up to call them.

You see your statement is simply not intellectually honest...in fact it is illogical and goes against reason.

And it proves that the Italian judiciary is corrupt beyond repair. They allow that the statements CAN NOT be used but they ignore the fact that the police and prosecutor did NOTHING to protect the defendants rights and in this case Mignini clearly had a responsibility to do exactly that and yet he did the exact opposite and you may wish to trust his lie about being a notary but his further actions to isolate and deny lawyers until the first hearing tells logical, intellectually honest people all they need to understand about Mr Mignini and how his corruption is the basis for this whole case against AK and RS.

From minutes of hearing before Judge Matteini of Nov. 8. 2007:

(...) At this point, the defence objects on the basis of nullity of today’s validation hearing because the rights of defence were violated since counsel with the defence attorney under art. 104 c.p.p. was not granted.

The Judge, having heard the Prosecutor who points out that he himself ordered the prohibition of counsel, rejects the objection raised by the defence given that the same art. 104 c.p.p., at paragraph 4, provides that in the event of police arrest, as in the present case,the Prosecutor has the power of preventing the suspect from having counsel with [his or her] defence attorney, until the same [suspect] appears before the Judge; on this date, given that the validation hearing was scheduled today it is obvious that the prohibition of counsel ceases all effects, and the revocation of such prohibition is now ordered anyway.
[The Judge] orders at this point to proceed further.