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

[christianahannah]

I continue to learn about a diverse range of things in this thread. I didn't know about the on-line check mark, thank you christianahannah and thanks to LondonJohn for asking the question

Yes there is an option not to show active or not. I leave the page open when I'm doing other work so decided I didn't want people thinking I was watching when I wasn't.

My response wasn't meant to out anyone (since this is a function of the forum and not top secret). It doesn't matter to me whether one can be viewed as online as long as their posts are able to be viewed.

I came upon it by accident. I wondered why there was no red check in my circle like everyone else and found out I must have checked that option when checking or not checking other things.

But now I have to wonder how many eyes are watching us as we post. Scary. Thanks Grinder.

 

[Poppy1016]

Says the man who believes lies are all the evidence he needs against Amanda.

It is painfully obvious that AK and RS were framed by use of false or non existant evidence. The problem is that it was done by people incompetent in their jobs,and unable to even plant evidence properly. IMHO

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>It doesn't make sense because had they wanted "to scare him" into turning they would have picked a knife that fit the outline or just used his knives. They already had his knives so why the odd choice of the kitchen knife. BW has made this case numerous times and it appears he is "sure" that is what happened.

You are assuming the cops were thinking rationally or strategically. They very well may have been thinking in signs and symbols, as Machiavelli does when he talks about being taken aback by the mention of fish blood. Nobody knows why the cops fetched a big, shiny kitchen knife in Raffaele's presence, so one guess is as good as another.

Since Raffaele didn't commit the murder and hadn't seen the autopsy (neither had the cops, I'm betting), he wouldn't have been thinking, "Oh no, I hope they don't take my small combat knives, which are more similar to the murder weapon than this kitchen knife."

His family or his attorneys could have verified it. He wasn't alone in a room when Mignini offered him a deal. He would have told of the offer by someone and they would be able to confirm. If there was good reason for them not to confirm, why did he publish it?

I haven't looked at his book in a while, but I have the impression that Raffaele was offered deals later and along the way, not just at the beginning.

 

[davefoc]

[...

His family or his attorneys could have verified it. He wasn't alone in a room when Mignini offered him a deal. He would have told of the offer by someone and they would be able to confirm. If there was good reason for them not to confirm, why did he publish it?

Good point, sort of. Have the attorneys been interviewed on this subject? Would they be willing to comment if they had been? I don't think his family is much of a useful source on this unless they contradicted him which is very unlikely. One would expect that out of family loyalty or because it's the truth that they would agree with him or remain silent. ETA: And it is also possible that family members wouldn't have direct knowledge of deals that were offered, so that they might not be able to corroborate Sollecito's claims even if they wanted to.

In most criminal trials in the US and I assume it's true in Italy, defendants are offered some kind of deal in return for not going to trial. And I assume it is standard prosecutorial strategy to try to turn one defendant against the other by offering deals. So Sollecito's claims ring true to me, but as far as I know, Sollecito's claims have not been corroborated.

 

[Grinder]

Yes, it's all conjecture. The worse possibility would be if the PLE chose this knife, this lone knife, for no reason at all. Otherwise it was the fastest & luckiest solving of a crime based on pure instinct since the Reichstag Fire Trial.

Tricky but they didn't "solve" the Reichstag fire as you know.

But look what it made Massei do in his motivations report. Massei at least had the sense to know that this knife is inextricably linked to motive. And since neither Amanda or Raffaele had a motive, so says Massei, then he had to invent the equally ridiculous, "Amanda carried it for protection," theory.

Good theories are supposed to converge on a hypothesis. Massei kept having to diverge into peripheral theories (like the "carrying for protection" theory) to plug leaks in his reasonings.

so what.

I also think this is reasonable. True, it's conjecture, but it also fits with the plucking of the random knife. They were intent to lean on Raffaele until he turned on Amanda. They thought he would buckle.

They thought wrong.

sounds more than a theory. I don't see this being reasonable. There was no need since they had his other knives.

 

[christianahannah]

Proper police procedure would have the videos collected withing a day or two. Retention policy should not have come into play even with the smallest retail store.

If they have public video cams that have less than a week's worth of retention it would be an example of poor use of the resource.

I have no idea about the car parks particulars.

If Patrick's was successfully clones that would prove they knew how to do it yet they fried all the others. How can that be explained?

I can see trying to collect videos that are near the cottage a day or two after (maybe this is when the car park video was checked). I don't think it would be feasible to collect every public and private video in Perugia until you could narrow it down a bit.

After Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick were arrested almost a week had passed to check videos near their homes or paths taken that night (longer with Rudy). I would hope the police still tried to do this. I don't know if the recordings would have still been available several days later.

There is the shop video of Amanda and Raffaele but I don't know when that was seized and if it was alerted to by the shopkeeper or found by the police.

 

[christianahannah]

I have his email address...would you like to ask him personally?

Maybe you should ask Machiavelli if he is okay with you giving out his email address. It would be the polite thing to do.

 

[RandyN]

The part that would be hilarious - if it wasn't so consequentially serious - is that the examination (i.e. destruction) of these hard drives was carried out by the specific unit of the Italian State Police that is supposed to specialise in the analysis of computer data!

It would be bad enough if some unqualified plod street cop had inadvertently wrecked the hard drives by fiddling around with them. But the fact that they were wrecked by the supposed "experts" of the State Police is, frankly, beyond ridicule.

Especially interesting is that AK hard drive was physically taken apart. That would indicate to me that the word expert could not be applied to whoever did this.

None the less the defense requested to have the drive repaired by the factory at their own expense which was denied by the court. This whole computer issue is nothing unique about the wrongdoing in this case. Simply one more indication of incompetence or even corruption. Aligning perfectly with the volumes of additional suspicious case behavior like missing interrogation tapes, failure to provide an independent interrupter, denial of a lawyer, failure to notify the American Consulate, prosecution witnesses lying in court, useless, highly suspect witnesses called into court by the prosecution...and on and on. Shameful!

 

[Grinder]

You are assuming the cops were thinking rationally or strategically. They very well may have been thinking in signs and symbols, as Machiavelli does when he talks about being taken aback by the mention of fish blood. Nobody knows why the cops fetched a big, shiny kitchen knife in Raffaele's presence, so one guess is as good as another.

I beg to differ. The idea that they would pick a knife that didn't fit anything else to use as threat makes no sense. The theory has the police figuring out this conspiracy to fool Raf into spilling the beans but not being able to see they already had more fitting knives.

Since Raffaele didn't commit the murder and hadn't seen the autopsy (neither had the cops, I'm betting), he wouldn't have been thinking, "Oh no, I hope they don't take my small combat knives, which are more similar to the murder weapon than this kitchen knife."

I'm sure the pen knife description was in Italian tabs as it was in brish tabs. More importantly the cops knew it so why would they pick a non-fitting knife when they already had a fitting knife. Or they could have picked another one that fit better. At the time that this faking out of Raf was supposed to work the details were cvoming out every day.

I haven't looked at his book in a while, but I have the impression that Raffaele was offered deals later and along the way, not just at the beginning.

Why aren't they corroborated?

 

[billyryan]

I can see trying to collect videos that are near the cottage a day or two after (maybe this is when the car park video was checked). I don't think it would be feasible to collect every public and private video in Perugia until you could narrow it down a bit.

After Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick were arrested almost a week had passed to check videos near their homes or paths taken that night (longer with Rudy). I would hope the police still tried to do this. I don't know if the recordings would have still been available several days later.

There is the shop video of Amanda and Raffaele but I don't know when that was seized and if it was alerted to by the shopkeeper or found by the police.

Raffaele and Amanda were not arrested for six days but they were suspects within one or two days,from the beginning they told the police they were at Raffaele's flat,as a matter of fact from the minute the police looked into Philomena's room they formed the opinion that the break in was staged,and the key holders were suspects,maybe the police did collect all cctv footage in the area of Raffaele's flat and the same unavoidable accident that happened to the computers occurred for a second time

 

[Grinder]

Good point, sort of. Have the attorneys been interviewed on this subject? Would they be willing to comment if they had been? I don't think his family is much of a useful source on this unless they contradicted him which is very unlikely. One would expect that out of family loyalty or because it's the truth that they would agree with him or remain silent. ETA: And it is also possible that family members wouldn't have direct knowledge of deals that were offered, so that they might not be able to corroborate Sollecito's claims even if they wanted to.

In most criminal trials in the US and I assume it's true in Italy, defendants are offered some kind of deal in return for not going to trial. And I assume it is standard prosecutorial strategy to try to turn one defendant against the other by offering deals. So Sollecito's claims ring true to me, but as far as I know, Sollecito's claims have not been corroborated.

Actually I don't think they have plea bargaining in Italy just the fast track option.

His father ran and runs the defense. It is not reasonable to assume that the family wouldn't have known about these alleged offers. IIRC the father was on Porto Porto and didn't corroborate the "deal".

If anybody corroborated the story I'm sure it will be posted here very soon but I certainly haven't seen it.

 

[Mary_H]

I beg to differ. The idea that they would pick a knife that didn't fit anything else to use as threat makes no sense. The theory has the police figuring out this conspiracy to fool Raf into spilling the beans but not being able to see they already had more fitting knives.

I'm sure the pen knife description was in Italian tabs as it was in brish tabs. More importantly the cops knew it so why would they pick a non-fitting knife when they already had a fitting knife. Or they could have picked another one that fit better. At the time that this faking out of Raf was supposed to work the details were cvoming out every day.

Why do you think they chose that knife?

Why aren't they corroborated?

I don't know whether they are or not. I don't see why that is something either side would reveal.

 

[RandyN]

Maybe you should ask Machiavelli if he is okay with you giving out his email address. It would be the polite thing to do.

Hummmmmm. Perhaps. OTOH the address could be old and unused. I am not in direct contact with Yummi/Mac. You do understand that I have not offered to publish it publicly...something his dear friends at the PMF's or on Pervert Quinells site might certainly do.

Today on PQ I see a call out for letters to Congress notifying them that the hearings on the Knox case are just another presentation by FOA attempting to keep a killer free. I suppose they will be inundated with 3 or 4 emails...

 

[RandyN]

I can see trying to collect videos that are near the cottage a day or two after (maybe this is when the car park video was checked). I don't think it would be feasible to collect every public and private video in Perugia until you could narrow it down a bit.

After Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick were arrested almost a week had passed to check videos near their homes or paths taken that night (longer with Rudy). I would hope the police still tried to do this. I don't know if the recordings would have still been available several days later.

There is the shop video of Amanda and Raffaele but I don't know when that was seized and if it was alerted to by the shopkeeper or found by the police.

Not all Perugia...how about the short distance between your suspects and the cottage? Since AK and RS were being called in every day from the 2nd on it seems likely they were suspects. I saw 5 or more cameras between RS and the cottage...how hard is this? Not rocket science actually...in fact I would start by making a 1/2 mile circle around the cottage and then check EVERY camera. Seems like basic common sense...and maybe even good investigative procedure...then again I am not the police or a detective...so what do I know.

 

[Mary_H]

Actually I don't think they have plea bargaining in Italy just the fast track option.

His father ran and runs the defense. It is not reasonable to assume that the family wouldn't have known about these alleged offers. IIRC the father was on Porto Porto and didn't corroborate the "deal".

If anybody corroborated the story I'm sure it will be posted here very soon but I certainly haven't seen it.

I would not jump to the conclusion Raffaele's father ran and runs the defense. If I were in his shoes, paying Giulia Bongiorno to defend my son, I would insist she focus completely on my son. Giulia Bongiorno, though, was of the opinion the prosecution wanted Amanda, and she focused her courtroom arguments quite a bit on Amanda, who, presumably, was not paying her fees.

 

[Grinder]

I can see trying to collect videos that are near the cottage a day or two after (maybe this is when the car park video was checked). I don't think it would be feasible to collect every public and private video in Perugia until you could narrow it down a bit.

After Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick were arrested almost a week had passed to check videos near their homes or paths taken that night (longer with Rudy). I would hope the police still tried to do this. I don't know if the recordings would have still been available several days later.

There is the shop video of Amanda and Raffaele but I don't know when that was seized and if it was alerted to by the shopkeeper or found by the police.

It would be standard operating procedure to collect videos in the vicinity asap. We aren't talking about that many in the 5 to 10 minute walk from the scene radius. Certainly they would walk the most likely escape routes and check the garbage cans and ask the storekeepers for any video footage they might have from 8pm to 1pm the next day.

They had a massive force from the very beginning. Videos don't usually get erased for a week no matter what Mach says. Store security would certainly like to be able to go back a few days if they notice a theft.

What good would video be if it were only kept 24 hours. But let's say that is true then the police in Italy would/should be trained to go out immediately and secure those recordings. They had the ICSI there by 3pm and they could have brought more troops from Rome if they had to get those tapes by eight that night.

Your point about the panty cam is spot on. How did they manage to get that so fast?

 

[acbytesla]

I don't know how Bill intended for his theory to be taken, but I took it that he offered it as a possibility and not a fact. My thought is that Bill has gone through the a similar process that I have with regard to trying to make sense out of what we know about the knife DNA testing and results and he came up with this as a possible partial explanation, but I think he would acknowledge that this is an area where the evidence isn't available to prove his conjecture.[/quote[

It doesn't make sense because had they wanted "to scare him" into turning they would have picked a knife that fit the outline or just used his knives. They already had his knives so why the odd choice of the kitchen knife. BW has made this case numerous times and it appears he is "sure" that is what happened.



His family or his attorneys could have verified it. He wasn't alone in a room when Mignini offered him a deal. He would have told of the offer by someone and they would be able to confirm. If there was good reason for them not to confirm, why did he publish it?

I'm curious Grinder, what does make sense about this knife? Virtually nothing does. Scaring Raffaele makes as much sense as anything else. In fact, more sense than they took this knife at random or because it looked "too clean" or that it smelled of bleach.

 

[Grinder]

Why do you think they chose that knife?

Because it looked clean and was on top. The detective remembered the purloined letter story and thought he would take what was left in the "open". As always I go with incompetence first, second, third...

I don't know whether they are or not. I don't see why that is something either side would reveal.

Perhaps I'm missing something but Raf published it in his book. He revealed it. One would think that someone on his team would have cleared it and that he would be backed by those that had middled the deal.

 

[Grinder]

I would not jump to the conclusion Raffaele's father ran and runs the defense. If I were in his shoes, paying Giulia Bongiorno to defend my son, I would insist she focus completely on my son. Giulia Bongiorno, though, was of the opinion the prosecution wanted Amanda, and she focused her courtroom arguments quite a bit on Amanda, who, presumably, was not paying her fees.

Okay I know it's early in day for you, but you think that daddy paid the lawyer but wasn't informed of a deal that was offered? Remember that Raf talked with his daddy every day and was dependent on him for money and that would be needed after he was found not guilty.

The fact that GB assessed the situation in way that had her "work" for both Raf and Amanda in no way reflects that daddy wasn't in control.

Are you honestly saying that the deal Raf describes was offered would not be known to his father?

 

[Mary_H]

I beg to differ. The idea that they would pick a knife that didn't fit anything else to use as threat makes no sense. The theory has the police figuring out this conspiracy to fool Raf into spilling the beans but not being able to see they already had more fitting knives.

That's my point -- it doesn't make sense. Did they do anything that made sense?

I'm sure the pen knife description was in Italian tabs as it was in brish tabs. More importantly the cops knew it so why would they pick a non-fitting knife when they already had a fitting knife. Or they could have picked another one that fit better. At the time that this faking out of Raf was supposed to work the details were cvoming out every day.<snip>

At the time they took Raffaele to the kitchen and grabbed the knife, Raffaele did not know he was a suspect. They had taken his knife at the station, but he thought that was just because they confiscated knives at the station, not because they thought his knife was the one that had committed the murder.

Again, why do you think the cops picked a non-fitting knife?