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

[RoseMontague]

A liar is a person who consciousously deceives, knowing what he says is false, and knowing the difference between false and truth, and does that for a purpose (lies on one side not on the other). This is how I would use the term.
If a person doesn't know the details, such as Nadeau, and gets things wrong randomly, she is only an approximate reporter.



Let's say, that what I guess, is that reporters got their wrong information and inference from sources like this one:

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/08_ottobre_20/perugia_amanda_meredith_b7ef75e0-9e8e-11dd-b7ca-00144f02aabc.shtml

What is most remarkable is the title. If you read the title it would seem that Meredith was killed in a ritual.

However, when you read the article you discover, in fact, that the reporters were not in the courtroom. What you have is reports by the parties (you have Maresca's audio report about his own requests).
Then you have the explanation of "rito" which is described as something rather similar to a sexual game, and in fact the paper calles it "rito sessuale":



However the "rito" is always between inverted commas, and it is coupled with the word "casalingo" (which suggest sthe contrary of a ritual).
Moreover, the newspaper goes on explaining that the "ritual" in fact "had no real background", and so - it says this expliticly - has nothing to do with esoterism nor satanism.
So the same source who tends to describe the prosecution as drawing a "ritual" scenario, also expliticly states that the prosecution says there's no link with any cult-like activity/content, nothing esoteric and nothing satanic.
This is what this source states.
There is an explicit assertion of the opposite, there is apparently an explicit "no satanism" and "no esoterism" claim by the prosecution.

However, this is not all we can say. In fact, given also that we know that this source was probably not in the courtroom, it's anyway better to check the documents directly, so we understand what Mignini meant.
And when we read what the prosecution actually said, we find out that there is not even a "sexual rite". There is actually no sex-rite in the prosecution scenario, but rather a sex party. The word used is "festino", not "rito". Obviously there is no esoterism nor satanism.
The "riti" which are mentioned are Halloween and the Celtic last night of the year. But they are entirely marginal, basically they are dates; there isn't a sexual rite and there isn't a sacrifice. There are manga comics, there is drug mentioned, other stuff, but not rituals.

So the journalist is reporting something incorrectly or imprecisely, maybe out of fragmentary and indirect information or simply putting togehter an incomplete summary. It's understandable. (even more understandable if some journalists are Spezi's friends). It is also understandable that some foreign language reporters who were fed by the same source or misunderstood something more, even jumped to the "satanic" scenario (which the Corriere explicitely denies).
But as Mignini, who once was questioned on the point, denied he ever put forward any esoteric or ritual scenario, why people think he did is not completely understandable.

Migi is so misunderstood. The poor unfortunate soul.

 

[Supernaut]

That report says that it seems possible DNA would be in pre-ejaculate. I agree. Those cells would be different from epithelials.



What Rudy wanted to do and what he succeeded in doing may be two completely different things. Meredith may already have had her pants off, as Katy has suggested, or Rudy may have pulled off Meredith's pants with the intention of genital intercourse. However, I think it is much more likely that he inserted his fingers to facilitate penile penetration and just did not get that far, because he was too excited and whacked out. I don't think he would have had the presence of mind to pull out, and I also I think there would have been some distention or bruising of the vagina or other clues that made it obvious genital penetration had taken place.

Worth bearing in mind that the most awkward part of removing a pair of jeans is getting them over the feet. It's quite easy to simply pull them down and ruck them up around the ankles, which then makes it possible to part the knees.

So I agree with both you AND LJ - whatever he eventually did, it appears that at some point he was intent on full intercourse.

ETA >> re. highlighted; I disagree - leaving semen inside someone you'd just knifed, almost certainly to death, is something Guede would have baulked at, no matter what state he was in (which was lucid enough to allow him to efficiently perform a 1st-floor break-in).

 

[Bill Williams]

I'm still taken with Machiavelli's claim that ALL judges agreed with Mignini.

So one last kick at the cat - text from Judge Massei's motivations report of 2010 is quoted here, showing that even the judge from the trial which convicted the pair disagreed with Mignini on major prosecution details - no more than in the ascribing of motive. To Mignini (eventually) the motive was a sex-game gone wrong.

Machiavelli in another post tries to argue that when Mignini had previously argued for a Satanic Rite, that what Mignini was "really" arguing for was a "sex party". No matter.

Because in the read of Judge Massei, there is no mention of a "rite", a "game gone wrong", or even a "sex party".

Amanda and Raffaele, having arrived at the house slightly after 23.00 pm, it should be considered that they went into Amanda’s room with the intention of being together, in intimacy...... Amanda and Raffaele who were together in Amanda’s house; together in Amanda’s room and alone, since Meredith was in her own room and Rudy, as previously mentioned, was in the bathroom.....

It is therefore probable that Rudy, coming out of the bathroom, let himself be carried away by a situation that he perceived as being charged with sexual stimuli and, giving in to his sexual urges, sought to satisfy them by going into Meredith’s room, where she was alone with the door at least partly open....

That Rudy then yielded to his lust, and tried to find sexual satisfaction with Meredith, is revealed by how Meredith’s body was found: wearing only a little t-shirt, pushed up to expose her breasts and for the rest completely nude, and by the results of the vaginal swab which showed biological traces of Rudy. There can be no doubt that the part of the girl’s body which Rudy had ‚lingered over‛ to the extent that he left his biological traces on her.....

Please note that Massei disbelieves that Rudy went into Meredith's room at Amanda and or Raffaele's urging. This means that it was NOT a sex game gone wrong, a result of Amanda's "revenge seeking" against Meredith, OR a Satanic rite. Please read this..... it debunks everything Mignini (and hence Machiavelli) have said.... it's no wonder Machiavelli does not even attempt a comprehensive narrative of the crime....

It is not possible, however, to know if Rudy went to Meredith’s room on his own initiative, almost subjugated by the situation which he interpreted in erotic terms (the two young lovers in their room and Meredith who was on her own in the room right next to it) or, instead, he went to Meredith’s room at the urging of Amanda and/or Raffaele.

This Court is inclined towards the first hypothesis.

To all this, Machiavelli says that one should not read reports such as these without the requisite legal training.....

The problem is that you first need to be able to read a judge Massei - know how to read a sentencing report, what is relevant, what is evidence.
Second, you shoud actually read what the prosecution said, if you want to compare them and find "differences".
And then, it won't be bad to know some little thing about the law; for example, what can be argued or used as argument and what can not.

What Machiavelli means is that when Massei says, "This Court is inclined towards the first hypothesis," that reading the really-relevant parts of Massei, reading what the evidence is, looking at what the prosecution said (which was that it was a sex-game gone wrong involving Amanda and Raffaele...) and knowing the law.....

That suddenly, "This Court is inclined towards the first hypothesis," becomes, "This court agrees with Mignini."

Nice try Machiavelli.......

This can be repeated by simply reading Massei's motivations, that Judge Massei, even in convicting the pair, saw no psychopathology in the pair, ruled no mixed blood, ruled that Raffaele had called the carabinieri BEFORE the postal police arrived, saw Meredith's and Amanda's relationship as normal (despite the prosecution calling witnesses to claim the opposite)...

In short, even Judge Massei disbelieved Mignini and his bizarre theories. Etc., etc., etc.

 

[Bill Williams]

So the journalist is reporting something incorrectly or imprecisely, maybe out of fragmentary and indirect information or simply putting togehter an incomplete summary. It's understandable. (even more understandable if some journalists are Spezi's friends). It is also understandable that some foreign language reporters who were fed by the same source or misunderstood something more, even jumped to the "satanic" scenario (which the Corriere explicitely denies).
But as Mignini, who once was questioned on the point, denied he ever put forward any esoteric or ritual scenario, why people think he did is not completely understandable.

So.... you're arguing against Mignini's use of the "Satanic rite" theory only for the sake of "understanding"?

You're calling Naseau a liar and John Kercher mistaken in 2013 only for sake of "understanding"?

I think you were far, far more revealing when you said:

My attitude contains an element of provocation that stems from a sense of outrage, actually kind of hostility which you direct against political or religious opponents, to expose the weakness of a dangerous propaganda

Instead of just laughing at us who claim that Mignini, in fact, did once try to advance the Satanic Rite theory... laugh at us as being woefully misinformed - because you have the actual transcripts which prove us wrong....

.... you engage in a quasi-religious struggle, much like a dispute in the middle ages where such religious struggles resulted in each side trying to burn the other at the stake.

Why is an issue like Mignini's Satanic Rite theory so important in 2013, if it is simply laughable and provably wrong? In 2013?

Unless it is dangerous for Mignini himself in what is to come?

 

[Bill Williams]

Oh yes.... and Machiavelli backing off calling Barbie Nadeau a liar, by referring to her instead as an, "approximate reporter" has made my week.

 

[Sergei Walankov]

This Michael Winterbottom/Kate Beckinsdale/Barbie Nadeau film is clearly not going to be what many here are fearing. From Nick Squires in the Daily Telegraph (which I'm not allowed to link to until I've left 15 comments on the site, but you can Google it easily enough):

The British actress Kate Beckinsale is to star in a film based on the murder of Meredith Kercher and the suspicions that fell on Amanda Knox, her American flatmate.
The 40-year-old will play an American journalist who covers the killing of the British student and the conviction and then acquittal of "Foxy Knoxy" and her then Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, for murder and sexual assault.
The journalist's character is based on Barbie Latza Nadeau, a Rome-based correspondent for The Daily Beast who wrote a book about the case, "Angel Face".
"There will be recognisable elements from the Kercher case but the film is more of a mirror of the events that went on in the background – the media frenzy surrounding the story," Ms Latza Nadeau, who has been a correspondent based in Italy for 16 years, told The Telegraph.
"It's certainly not a judgment of innocence or guilt – it's about the people who created the circus." Miss Knox and her ex-boyfriend were found guilty of sexual assault and murder in 2009 but then acquitted by an appeals court in Perugia in 2011.

There's a fair bit to get annoyed with there of course, but clearly the film is not going to be an expose of guilty Amanda and her mendacious PR campaign. There was a quote on this site a few pages back which caused some to draw that conclusion, but it was actually from the blurb of Nadeau's book.

 

[RoseMontague]

This Michael Winterbottom/Kate Beckinsdale/Barbie Nadeau film is clearly not going to be what many here are fearing. From Nick Squires in the Daily Telegraph (which I'm not allowed to link to until I've left 15 comments on the site, but you can Google it easily enough):



There's a fair bit to get annoyed with there of course, but clearly the film is not going to be an expose of guilty Amanda and her mendacious PR campaign. There was a quote on this site a few pages back which caused some to draw that conclusion, but it was actually from the blurb of Nadeau's book.

Thanks Sergei. This one might actually be an interesting movie.

 

[Matthew Best]

Like you say, "tastes" differ, but Winterbottom is and will probably always be a wannabe and phony - not to mention a careerist, mindful of Camden and Hampstead house prices.

I've found his movies to be wildly inconsistent - some I have found boring ("Genova" comes to mind), or ludicrous and ghastly ("The Killer Inside Me") but others are fantastic. No love for "The Trip" or "Cock & Bull Story"? Not even "In This World"?

Baffling. Or is he Jewish?

 

[Diocletus]

The "riti" which are mentioned are Halloween and the Celtic last night of the year. But they are entirely marginal, basically they are dates; there isn't a sexual rite and there isn't a sacrifice. There are manga comics, there is drug mentioned, other stuff, but not rituals.

* * *

But as Mignini, who once was questioned on the point, denied he ever put forward any esoteric or ritual scenario, why people think he did is not completely understandable.

Let’s assume for sake of argument that Machiavelli’s latest tale is true: the Italian press/Corriere della Sera made up the whole Halloween/Satanic riti thing out of thin air (I don’t actually believe for one second that law enforcement had nothing to do with this meme, however; and in fact, Machiavelli seems to admit in his double-speak way, that these “riti” were alleged in court).

What that would mean is that Mignini stood by while a defendant was being helplessly prejudiced in the press with false and sensational allegations. He stood there silently for years, allowing this meme to flourish, because it helped the prosecution by making the defendants look like evil and sick people, capable of murder and deserving of punishment. Mignini acceded to these allegations because they helped the prosecution by prejudicing the defendants in a country that conducts extremely lengthy trials, doesn’t sequester its jurors and is peculiarly superstitious.

Now, Mignini knows that the insanity in the press has died down, and except for credulous fools and sycophants, the world sees that these people are innocent. The Halloween/Satanic riti thing makes the whole prosecution, indeed, the whole justice system look infantile, medieval, provincial, silly, unfair. Instead of helping the prosecution, it undermines it. So, Mignini, being the opportunist that he is, now, six years later, decides that he should distance himself from this ridiculous meme. He is not doing this because of some perceived unfairness to the defendants or even to protect the system; rather, he is doing to save his own face.

Contrary to Machiavelli’s likely intent, this whole scenario makes Italy, Italians, and the Italian justice system look even worse. After all, who couldn’t have accepted that a local magistrate went rogue and unfairly obtained a conviction that was later corrected by the system? But now, according to Machiavelli, Mignini gets a pass and instead we have the press, the prosecution and the supreme court all colluding to wrongfully convict a young foreign girl in order to cover up for their various incompetences.

What a very sad and shameful system. Ghastly folks, all of them.

 

[Diocletus]

A liar is a person who consciousously deceives, knowing what he says is false, and knowing the difference between false and truth, and does that for a purpose (lies on one side not on the other). This is how I would use the term.
If a person doesn't know the details, such as Nadeau, and gets things wrong randomly, she is only an approximate reporter.

Hm. So let's see:

Stefanoni = Liar

Amanda Knox = Approximate Reporter

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Danse Macabre on the Bald Mountain

The Rhapsody was brilliant (it helps to have a genuine prodigy at the piano) but I was primarily there for Shosty's 11th. That little ditty always keeps the old folks awake and leaves one's ears ringing. Perhaps I'm just a revolutionary at heart, but I feel it has great relevance to our time -- and to this case in particular.

I am unfamiliar with it, but I will try to find a recording. That reminds me, what music was played at the concert at which Amanda and Raffaele met? Maybe Night on Bald Mountain? Totentanz? The Mephisto Waltz? Danse Macabre? That might explain a few things. Maybe not though.

 

[Grinder]

Certainly Grinder thinks I'm a nutcase for pursuing this with Machiavelli so forcefully....

"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment"

.... it's also that Machiavelli makes some very side-issue bizarre statements.... now he backs off calling Barbie Nadeau a liar, now he calls her euphemistically, "an approximate reporter". And let be remind all what's at stake here... Nadeau thinks Mignini had the Satanic rite as a working theory, and further writes that Comodi had to threaten to quit if Mignini took it to trial to get him to back off.

You report the same thing about what she reported. Barbie also said that there was mixed blood and she had talked with 9 forensic experts that substantiated that. I'd say approximate reporter is spot on.

I now get a better sense as to why Machiavelli fights this tooth and nail.... because this COULD be potentially as dangerous when Spezi's stuff is dealt with, as well as potentially some fall out for Mignini after the ISC signs off on the Kercher Murder Trials.

Dangerous how?

 

[Grinder]

How many people do you think read beyond the title?

Well so what? I know one poster here that doesn't . And I'm criticized for not reading all the fiction accounts in books.

(As an aside -- we don't call them inverted commas, we call them quotation marks.)

Tomato tomaaato. I've decided to call yellow journalists "approximate journalists" and in that spirit inverted commas as well. It's so continental.

Again, it is a puzzle why Mignini allowed these misunderstandings to continue. It's almost as if it served his purposes to have the papers report something different from what was going on in the courtroom.

How widespread was the reporting of this in Italy? The satanic rite stuff hasn't been reported all that much outside of partisan bloggers and commenters here and elsewhere.

I'm still waiting for Bill's source material outside of Barbie.

 

[Grinder]

Which is part of the puzzle isn't it.

It's why it'd be informative when Mignini started claiming about being accused of theorizing about a Satanic Rite.

And once again why Machiavelli and Mignini see a need for, in 2013, a full bore defence on this point?

I'm going with the "Mignini consulted a psychic" theory for now.... maybe Machiavelli will tell us what it is about Italian law where that's frowned upon.

Leaving out Mach's posting would you detail the "full bore defense".

 

[Grinder]

I know, my point was it was easier for a female to get there if they're out drinking all night long.

They get there faster but process the same. You and others have contended that she was a veteran drinker at 20 which was substantiated by ...drumroll... Barbie as she reported that Meredith had been cited for public intoxication in England.

That would explain the stumbling. Note that effects vary considerably from person to person depending on tolerance, people that drink more often (generally) learn to function with higher BACs--up until a certain point.

Please if you have any sort of cite that's not a fiction novel, I would appreciate seeing it. Oh h*** give me the true crime novel if that's where it comes from.

I think tracing her day of death may be of value. I know that one side is totally on the burglary and the other on evil planned murder but perhaps her state played a part. I have never heard this stumbling that morning and would be curious as to who accompanied her home, etc.


[quote[Tolerance works the same way when coming down, your mind and body adjusts to the poison you're putting in it and tries to keep you functioning. That's why people that drink heavily have to be careful the next day as they may feel they're not legally intoxicated, they will have the BAC to prove it if they get pulled over driving to work the next morning.[/QUOTE]

She was 21 years old. How much tolerance do you think she had built up. Regardless the science says she would have processed at a rate of .015 and I'm not at convinced she would still have had a full drink in her at 9:30 or 10.

 

[Grinder]

This appears all correct, in my admittedly several month acquaintance with the case, although a vast amount can be learned in this time with the press reports from the time etc. I am perfectly certain that this forum, being the open to all comers one, reflects the truth, in successfully exhausting the jailers. Machiavelli doesn't answer my questions, the one I wish he would is if he believes the Italian system would be better if Guede had to testify as a witness to a murder he saw/heard committed by AK and RS. He loves legal form to declare truths, I prefer logical function.

It may be that in this case his testimony would improve the truth seeking. It may be that in the greater picture that the system works as is, at least for making people testify in cases that involve themselves.

Just an aside, I became highly suspicious of the case when the police chief reported that she had buckled and told them what they knew to be correct.

When Patrick came up with an alibi I was sure that the "accusation" was bogus and the case crippled. The bra coming 47 days late was like a bad TV show script. The knife DNA was clearly bogus or at a minimum not good enough for prime time.

 

[Grinder]

This.
I'm glad you've brought this up Dave.
It is exactly on a forum like Jref that I would expect people to admit to possible bias, rather than deny it for themselves, and project it upon others.

The evidence that I have seen suggests to me that K&S are not guilty of killing MK. I don't trust all of the information I've seen, and i don't believe I have all of the information i need to sit in judgment.

The existence and use of the term 'guilters' (similar as it is to 'truthers') is condescending, and to me, in this case, doesn't do the user any credit.

Shortly after I joined here I requested that people stop using the terms "guilter", "hater" or "groupies^tm. I suggested using PG for pro guilt and PI for pro innocence and most people have used those terms which I don't find pejorative just descriptive.

 

[Bill Williams]

Again, it is a puzzle why Mignini allowed these misunderstandings to continue. It's almost as if it served his purposes to have the papers report something different from what was going on in the courtroom.

How widespread was the reporting of this in Italy? The satanic rite stuff hasn't been reported all that much outside of partisan bloggers and commenters here and elsewhere.

I'm still waiting for Bill's source material outside of Barbie.

With respect, Grinder, you're missing the point....

 

[Bill Williams]

"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment"


You report the same thing about what she reported. Barbie also said that there was mixed blood and she had talked with 9 forensic experts that substantiated that. I'd say approximate reporter is spot on.

I now get a better sense as to why Machiavelli fights this tooth and nail.... because this COULD be potentially as dangerous when Spezi's stuff is dealt with, as well as potentially some fall out for Mignini after the ISC signs off on the Kercher Murder Trials.

Dangerous how?

Re: Nadeau.... ok, I take it neither you nor Machiavelli are going to be on her Christmas list this year....

Re: "dangerous how?" Well, now that's the question for me, as shallow and shamelessly conspiratorial it is. This is a far more interesting question (which admittedly may go nowhere) than trying to figure out:

1) when the Satanic Rite issue entered the lexicon of this case
2) when either Mignini or Machiavelli first complained about its use​

The fact that they are now, in 2013, complaining about it says little about 2007-8 and buckets about 2013 and perhaps beyond.

I ask again, why is this a line in the sand in 2013? That's a far, far more interesting question than if Nadeau is a liar or just an "approximate reporter".

Sheesh - with friends like Machiavelli and Vogt, who needs enemies? Did Barbie's movie deal with Kate Beckinsdale really piss them off that much?

 

[Bill Williams]

A liar is a person who consciousously deceives, knowing what he says is false, and knowing the difference between false and truth, and does that for a purpose (lies on one side not on the other). This is how I would use the term.
If a person doesn't know the details, such as Nadeau, and gets things wrong randomly, she is only an approximate reporter.

Hm. So let's see:

Stefanoni = Liar

Amanda Knox = Approximate Reporter