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

[Bill Williams]

My point is how can Moore investigate a crime that occurred in another country and he does not have access to evidence? He is no different from me and you, as far as I can see.

Has the FBI ever corrobarated his claims of being a crime scene investigator. He kind of seems like a dumb jock or somebody jsut looking to get on CNN as a talking head.

Whatever.

 

[acbytesla]

My point is how can Moore investigate a crime that occurred in another country and he does not have access to evidence? He is no different from me and you, as far as I can see.

Has the FBI ever corrobarated his claims of being a crime scene investigator. He kind of seems like a dumb jock or somebody jsut looking to get on CNN as a talking head.

1. Steve Moore has had access to all the files.
2. Steve Moore is a detective. He is a seasoned investigator.
3. John Douglass also had access to the files.
4. Douglass is one of the world's most highly regarded investigators of violent crimes. Formerly in charge of the behavioral science departments for the FBI.

 

[Bill Williams]

Stefanoni was never caught lying, Diocletus, and you know that.

The operative term is "caught". She never turned over the raw EDFs, she only turned over her summaries, and Judge Massei dared the defence to call her a liar, while at the same time denying them the tools to prove it.

I think that's the way it works in some courts in Italy.

 

[LondonJohn]

Stefanoni was never caught lying, Diocletus, and you know that.

*stifles laughter*

Which example of her lying would you like?

 

[Bill Williams]

1. Steve Moore has had access to all the files.
2. Steve Moore is a detective. He is a seasoned investigator.
3. John Douglass also had access to the files.
4. Douglass is one of the world's most highly regarded investigators of violent crimes. Formerly in charge of the behavioral science departments for the FBI.

I'm getting the feeling we're being trolled. Someone shows up on a new account, asking innocent questions, then as the posts develop, the poster seems to have an agenda.

Hmmmmmmmmm I think we saw this on IIP a few months ago.... hmmmmmm.

 

[Bill Williams]

How can Moore get access to the files of a murder case in another country? Especially one that has not been resolved.

Did they Fed Ex him the DNA samples as well?

This doesn't seem legit.

Not to you. The Carabinieri has just semi-released a report on the kinfe. It appears that the Carabinieri in Italy now agree with what Moore has said all along. That kitchen knife had nothing to do with the crime.

 

[acbytesla]

Click on the links below to read other articles by Steve Moore.

The Mountain of Missing Evidence

Evidence Collection

The Luminol Lies

The Interrogation That Never Was
Investigation of Violent Crimes is My Life; Not a Hobby
by, Steve Moore

Geoffrey...See Below

My name is Steve Moore; I retired from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2008 after 25 years as a Special Agent and Supervisory Special Agent. My entire investigative experience was in the investigation and prosecution of violent crime, from murder to mass-murder and terrorism. In my last such assignment, I was the Supervisor of the Al Qaeda Investigations squad, following which I ran the FBI’s Los Angeles-based “Extra-Territorial Squad”, which was tasked with responding to any acts of terrorism against the United States in Asia and Pakistan. I have investigated murders throughout the United States and the world.

I do not know Amanda Knox. I have never met or spoken with anybody in the Knox or Mellas families. In my 25 years in the FBI, I had come to believe that if you were arrested, you were probably guilty. I never had a person I took to trial who wasn’t convicted. I was especially tired of guilty persons claiming their innocence.

I had heard snippets about the Knox case from the news, and believed that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were certainly guilty. But then I began to hear statements from the press that contradicted known facts. Wanting to resolve the conflicts, I looked into the case out of curiosity. The more I looked, the more I was troubled by what I found. So I looked deeper, and I ended up examining every bit of information I could find (and there’s a lot of it). The more I investigated, the more I realized that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito could not have had anything to do with the murder of Meredith Kercher. Moreover, one reason that they were falsely convicted was that every rule of good investigation was violated.

I spent years of my life working on cases in the federal courts, from simple murder to mass shootings to weapons of mass destruction. In the U.S., the totality of the evidence and the hunches of the investigators in this matter would not have been sufficient to get a search warrant, much less take somebody to trial. The case is completely flawed in every way. The physical evidence against Amanda and Raffaele is wrong, contrived, misinterpreted, and (to put it kindly) misstated. The other “evidence” is made up of (embarrassingly naïve) hunches and bias. The “DNA” evidence is particularly inaccurate. The alleged motive and modus operandi of Knox/Sollecito is so tortured (and constantly-changing) that it defies belief.

“FACTS DETERMINE CONCLUSIONS”—The universal truism of investigation. The instant that one’s conclusions determine or change the facts, you have corrupted the judicial system.
I have been a young investigator, and I have supervised eager but inexperienced young investigators. Young or inexperienced investigators have a tendency to believe their own hunches. This is dangerous, because uneducated hunches are usually wrong. Hunches are not bad, they just need to be allowed to die a natural death when evidence proves them wrong. The sign of an investigation run amok is when an initial hunch is nurtured and kept on life support long after evidence should have killed it. This case is just such a situation. In the Knox case, the investigator openly states:

“We knew she was guilty of murder without physical evidence.” -- Edgardo Giobbi, Investigator.

Then, when physical evidence came in that did not support their story, they simply changed their story. And their suspects. And their murder weapons. And the motives. (If there was ever a ‘smoking gun’ in this case; that statement was it.)

I will only say of the interrogation, that if any FBI Agents I supervised had conducted that interrogation in the U.S., I would have had them indicted. I am not surprised that Amanda made incriminating and conflicting statements in such a horrible situation. I am more surprised that under that duress, she didn’t make more incriminating (but ultimately false) statements. Hypothetically, any trained investigator operating for many hours without rules, in a foreign language, slapping and threatening a naïve, frightened girl just out of her teens and in a foreign country, (denying her food, sleep and the right to an attorney and Consular advice) can get her to say just about anything. If this was the medical profession, one might deem such activities “intentional malpractice”.

The investigators in this matter appeared to have decided upon a conclusion, and repeatedly changed their story so that the evidence would suit their conclusions. After the evidence came back that Rudy Guede sexually assaulted Meredith, did it not occur to the investigators that they had a simple rape/murder? The simplest answer is usually the correct answer. Crimes are only this complicated in James Bond movies. Amanda would not even have been a suspect in any US investigation. A sex murder occurs and your prime suspect is the female roommate? Experienced, or simply competent investigators would have known that statistically, 90% of murders are committed by men. When women commit murder, only 16% use a knife, and close examination might show that the vast majority of those are gang-related. Any conclusion that involves a woman stabbing another woman is statistically so rare, that it should be looked at with great suspicion.

There is also a thing called “leakage”. Leakage is the tendency of homicidal or mentally ill people to ‘leak’ behavior that would indicate their true nature. If one is to believe that Amanda Knox was the drug-crazed, homicidal Svengali that she was made out to be, there is absolutely NO way that such sociopathic behavior would not be leaked in some significant way prior to this crime. No, instead we see a girl on the Dean’s list working several jobs to attend a university program in Italy. A girl who had not even had a scrape with law enforcement.

A good auto mechanic who lacks scruples, can take a car out of a junk yard, bolt on a couple of new fenders, drop in new carpets and slap on tires and a $100 coat of paint. Once he cleans up the interior and rolls back the odometer, he could sell it as a near new car to 99% of the population. It appears new, the mileage says it’s new, and only a trained mechanic would know the difference.

But bring in a trained mechanic, and he might notice that the brake pedal, for instance, is worn almost to the metal. That’s a sure sign of 100,000 miles of use or more. The hint of blue smoke out of the exhaust would be a dead give-away of a worn-out motor. He would warn you that all is not as pretty and new as it seems.

Take my word for this. Investigation of violent crimes is my life; not a hobby. The case the Italian prosecutors are trying to sell you is not the beautiful thing it appears to some to be. It’s a junker all cleaned-up and waiting to be purchased by naïve people. And the jury in Perugia bought it.

 

[Bill Williams]

I merely have an opinion.

I've been following this case for 3 years or so.

I think her written declaration is really all they need for a conviction.

You're entitled to your view. If you think that, you're patently wrong. Maybe Machiavelli will tell you why as a matter of procedure....

 

[Antony]

I tend to agree with this.

If Knox had accused an innocent black man of murder in the United States, nobody would think she is innocent.

... except she didn't. The alleged statements by Amanda "accusing" Patrick Lumumba were coerced by police - "she buckled and gave a version of the facts we knew to be correct" (Perugia police chief Arturo di Felice, 6 Nov 2007).

The conviction handed to her on this count does not stand scrutiny.

 

[Machiavelli]

Are you sure Nencini didn't accept the defence computer report, Mach? I thought there was a quote from Bongiorno after the last hearing saying she was satisfied because the court had accepted that report into the case file.

Well, let me think. I recall Nencini basically refused all defensive expert reports, and he only accepted the photos of Sollecito's nails (which are documentation) and accepted the testimonies that were to be completed as ordered by the supreme court, but refused everything else. However, I am not 100% sure, your indication makes me doubt. I don't know what Bongiorno said exactly, so if you have a link that might be useful.

 

[Machiavelli]

Fortunately all this is moot. The Caribinieri had already turned over both positive AND negative controls to the defence, as well as the RAW files.... in short, the Carabinieri are making full disclosure - probably most probably the new prosecutor in Florence - so there will not be the same argument.

The Carabinieri seem to know what full disclosure is all about and do not rely on Machiaveliian word games about procedure. And so far it looks like the Carabinieri are sustaining what Conti & Vecchiotti reported.

It seems to me the Carabinieri sustain Novelli's bio-statystical methodology.

 

[acbytesla]

How can Moore get access to the files of a murder case in another country? Especially one that has not been resolved.

Did they Fed Ex him the DNA samples as well?

This doesn't seem legit.

Copies from Amanda's lawyers... DOH!!!

 

[Mary_H]

I merely have an opinion.

I've been following this case for 3 years or so.

I think her written declaration is really all they need for a conviction.

A conviction for what? Cowering in the kitchen with her ears covered? She did not declare she took part in the murder, or that she knew what Patrick's plans (or actions) were.

 

[acbytesla]

I merely have an opinion.

I've been following this case for 3 years or so.

I think her written declaration is really all they need for a conviction.

Really Geoffrey? You have been following the case for 3 years. I'm curious, what is on that written declaration? Is it in her handwriting?

Or did they just have her sign it? Is any of the statement accurate? What does that tell you Geoffrey?

 

[LondonJohn]

I merely have an opinion.

I've been following this case for 3 years or so.

I think her written declaration is really all they need for a conviction.

So do you think that the Central Park Jogger Five and the Birmingham Six were correctly convicted as well? After all, they all also "confessed" to murder....

(Hint: all of the above were subsequently acquitted and exonerated).

Perhaps you should also read this article about a person who was coerced into a false confession. The subject eventually "confessed" to being involved in a murder, yet it later transpired that he was provably in an entirely different continent at the time of the murder.

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/LegalCenter/story?id=1779251


And try reading this too:

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/coerced_confessions/6.html


"Confessions" are not always everything they seem.....

 

[Bill Williams]

Italian justice is long on procedure, it seems. This seems like the easiest conviction of all time and they are still messing with 6 years later.

Here are my untested observations that lead me to convict:
Knox isn't very bright, as her written declaration exposes.
Knox did drugs. Many homicides are drug related.
Knox had opportunity. Nobody else was around on this weekend plus it was her house.
Knox had motive. Did not get along with Meredith, possibly jealous.
The boyfriend seems to be weird and also a druggie.
Knox accused a black man of murder who turns out to be innocent.
Knox and the boyfriend have no alibi other than each other. What is probality of having no alibi the same night your roommate is murdered in your house?
Knox was acting weird after the murder.

Most of the cases on Law and Order are more complicated than this one, it seems. WHat am I missing?

Evidence, logic, and a comprehensive theory of the crime which includes them. The forensics pretty much excludes them.

 

[LondonJohn]

If you were innocent, would you put yourself at the murder scene?

That is the last thing you would do. So unless this girl was high as a kite that night at the police station, she was there.

If this case was in Texas, they would have executed her 5.75 years ago.

Italians always second guess themselves. They lack confidence.

So I'm now certain that you're unfamiliar with the well-documented and proven phenomenon of coerced false confessions. Again, maybe read the links I provided above. Then tell us why the people discussed in those links confessed to murders they provably had no involvement in....

 

[Bill Williams]

If you were innocent, would you put yourself at the murder scene?

That is the last thing you would do. So unless this girl was high as a kite that night at the police station, she was there.

If this case was in Texas, they would have executed her 5.75 years ago.

Italians always second guess themselves. They lack confidence.

So you did not answer the question about the Central Park Five... who also put themselves at the scene.

 

[Mary_H]

If you were innocent, would you put yourself at the murder scene?

You're a little late to this party. Go back to the first thread for links and statistics on false confessions.

If this case was in Texas, they would have executed her 5.75 years ago.

Yes, but if it had happened in a civilized state, it would never have made it to a courtroom.

P.S. You are spelling Geoffrey wrong.

 

[Dan O.]

I can't see the police giving her a name or telling her they think it was a black man who did it. The idea is to get independent corrobaration of certain facts in the case.

The ideal idea is to get corrobaration of certain facts in the case. If you were doing that you would absolutely insure that the session was recorded so you could double check that you weren't leading the witness to the conclusion and could cross check any information that was recovered. The only record of those interrogations that exist apart from the "confessions" written by the police in Italian that Amanda could barely understand is Amanda's own documentation of what happened written in the hours following that ordeal. This was written at a time when Amanda would assume that the interrogations were recorded so she would not write anything that could be proven a lie by such a recording. For this reason, I trust that what Amanda writes about the interrogations are as accurate as she could be.

I think Knox did it because of the race angle.

You are only succeeding in making yourself look like a racist.