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

[Machiavelli]

So, niether classical rule applies to Knox and Sollecito then, who were deemed to be suspiciously under co-operative and absent of distress. (...)

I already made my argument and nobody by now was able to refute it.

You are now just attempting a low-level rhetoric game (definitions etc.) to divert attention from the particular point, because your side lost it.

 

[Diocletus]

He remained a formal suspect for over 4 months, maybe even 6 months, as far as I remember.

That's a shame because migini had exonerating dna results on November 8, 2007, yet he hid them so that lumumba would have to stay in jail. That's criminal.

 

[Machiavelli]

That's a shame because migini had exonerating dna results on November 8, 2007, yet he hid them so that lumumba would have to stay in jail. That's criminal.

Exonerating DNA? Hiding...? What the heck are you making up now?
The scenario involving Lumumba was dismantled by investigators between Nov 13 and Nov. 20.
Mignini wrote a letter to the investigating judge on Nov. 18. saying there was no serious evidence against Lumumba.

 

[Diocletus]

Exonerating DNA? Hiding...? What the heck are you making up now?
The scenario involving Lumumba was dismantled by investigators between Nov 13 and Nov. 20.
Mignini wrote a letter to the investigating judge on Nov. 18. saying there was no serious evidence against Lumumba.

He had the vaginal swab and feces samples that both showed the same profile of a male who was not lumumba (or Sollecito). Mignini his those results from Matteini.

 

[Skind]

I already made my argument and nobody by now was able to refute it.

You are now just attempting a low-level rhetoric game (definitions etc.) to divert attention from the particular point, because your side lost it.

Several people have refuted it, including yourself.

You inability to accept this is not proof that your arguement has not been refuted.

You simply point to characteristics of stagers, and then point to contrary characteristics of K+S, and then declare that they are compatible.

To put it another way - you declare stagers to be over-distressed and over-focused. You then point to examples of K+S being purportedly under-distressed as an example of them being stagers.

It's an inately self-refuting arguement. You simply cannot point to an example of contrary and incompatible behaviour and declare it proof of compatible behaviour.

 

[Grinder]

Actually it's quite the contrary; the perception that the break in was staged preceeded all narrative about the crime. Actually it even preceeded the discovery of the body. Battistelli and Marzi suspected it was staged even before they discovered the murder.

And they didn't think there was any urgency to break down the door. I guess their intuition wasn't very good.

 

[kwill]

Still waiting for that description of how and when Amanda and Raffaele supposedly killed Meredith, given that the contents of her stomach put her likeliest time of death at about 9:30 pm.

All this time spent trying to analyze her urgency of lack thereof, the tone of her emails, the wording of Raffaele's conversations with the police, etc. are just so much blathering without that timeline & description.

Come on. How and when did they do it? We can talk about why if somebody can build just one plausible scenario that fits the physical evidence.

 

[Dan O.]

I wonder if anybody did a careful search of the rock for signs of the paint that might have attached to it as it struck the white interior shutter where Hendry thinks it did. Hendry seems to discount the possibility that the rock hit the interior side of the exterior shutter but there is some damage there that he shows in the pictures in his article. If green pain could be found on the rock that would almost eliminate any possibility that the rock was thrown from the inside.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry------2.html

Ron Hendry from your link:

The final resting position of the rock indicated that the person throwing the rock was located somewhat to the driveway entrance side instead of directly in front of the window. The small contact zone to the inside wooden shutter relative to the size of the rock inferred that the shutter was partially open when impacted by the large rock.
​

I had always presumed that the inner shutters were closed but not latched due to there being no damage to the latch. But I just discovered that there was no separate latch on the left hand inner shutter as there was on the right (there is no overview of the inside with the left window closed, only the close up of the window latch). The window latch would be in the way of closing the inner shutter all the way. An observant burglar may have noticed this on prior occasions when the room lights were on.


On the exterior shutter there are a couple of marks showing recent damage. One is behind the latch and impossible to have been hit without also leaving a mark on the latch. The other on the 6th slat from the bottom is much higher than the impact mark on the inner shutter. For this to have been caused by the rock would require a significant downward motion of the rock and I would think that such an angle would cause the rock to strike the edge of the inside sill. A close examination of the sill in photo dec_0105 shows only a couple of very small chips in the plaster on this edge. The chips do look fresh so I won't rule out the possibility of contact.


The pieces of crushed glass on the inner sill are very interesting. I'm not sure though how to interpret them.

 

[RandyN]

Exonerating DNA? Hiding...? What the heck are you making up now?
The scenario involving Lumumba was dismantled by investigators between Nov 13 and Nov. 20.
Mignini wrote a letter to the investigating judge on Nov. 18. saying there was no serious evidence against Lumumba.

Great! So why did Mignini keep Lumumbas bar closed for months
as a crime scene then? Not to apply illegal and undue pressure on him right? No never. Bunch of corrupt bass herds.

Stop with your nonsense argument Yummi.

Tells us about the "curse of Amanda" yes sure... its karma jerks which is visiting the den of serpents now. Tomorrow (Dec 6th) is Comodi and Mignini and later the dirty brother of video maker owner who is secretary of Perugia office of public prosecutor all cheating the Italian public and robbing it blind.

15 Jan is Mignini in Turin, oh Giuttari too...LOL!!! Perfect! What happened to your exoneration? Just another lie it seems.

And directly from Oggi..."In Perugia, the policewoman Monica Napoleoni, ex-head of the homicide section, and her colleagues Stefano Gubbiotti and Lorena Zugaroni, are being investigated for abuse of power and inducement to breach the reserved computer system; all of them were protagonists of the detention, interrogation and arrest of Amanda and Raffaele." Once again...LOL perfect!

Rita you are next...unless karma decides to slap you to death...

Pervert prison guard Agiro is being called up to answer for his abuse and perversion. Perhaps Pacelli can defend him... opps no...because...wait for it...also directly from Oggi

"In his speeches he throws himself with great vehemence against Amanda, calling her ‘a witch’. Now, with his office colleague Sabrina Scaroni, arrested for stealing 300 thousand Euros of tax payment, he is being charged with untruthful defense, fraud and slander." ....Im thinking he may not be available...

And they all want to term it "The curse of Amanda". Foolish Italians don't understand karma. And so karma will first teach them the meaning of karma and then the slow Italians will be re-visited by karma...which is a double dose due to stupidity...and karma has a lesson about that too.

Please its getting painful to watch...stop digging, stop shooting yourselves in the foot, drain the swamp...or pick any other metaphorical story about common sense and logic. You are embarrassing yourselves and karma is knocking at your doors...PERFECT!

Now Yummi are you denying the Oggi article? Perhaps you should start a law suit against them. It is Migninis style...suppress the unfavorable press...ahhhh may be too late for that...the world has already seen him with his bare behind sticking out.

Don't catch cold...

Here read it for yourself...

OGGI MAGAZINE:
And they are already calling it ‘The Curse of Amanda’.......
While the new trial that sees Knox and Sollecito accused is underway, several prosecutors, police and lawyers involved in the case are in their turn having to defend themselves against various types of charges.
Florence, November....by Giangavino Sulas
The extremely hard summing up from Alessandro Crini, Substitute Procurator General, in front of the Court of Assises of Florence came as no surprise. Not after the preamble with which he had introduced the 15 points which, for him, constitute the bastion of evidence against the two young people. A castle indicated in the motivation report from the Supreme Court, which annulled the judgement of absolution in the original Appeal. Crini followed these pointers, from beginning to end, reiterating the most controversial witnesses and results of the Scientific Police in the Trial of First Instance. Now the trial is heading to its conclusion six years after the murder of Meredith Kercher, the destinies of Raffaele and his ex-girlfriend once again hang by a thread, with the public prosecutor ever more forceful in his certainty. But then again things aren’t going too well for those who have asked for their conviction.
Many of them are having in their turn to defend themselves. On December 6th the Public Minister Manuela Comodi who, with Giuliano Mignini, supported the prosecutor in calling for life imprisonment for Amanda and Raffaele, will be tried by the CSM (Superior Magistrates Court) for originating the video of the reconstruction of the murder of Meredith, screened in Court during the summing up, but never deposited in the Court files, and therefore never added to the trial records. In summary, for the trial this film doesn’t exist and yet Manuela Comodi has paid off, at the end of the contract, a fee of 182,740 Euros
to the firm that made it. And in the payment order, according to the prosecutor,‘did not explain the reasons and the criteria adopted for payment’, while the firm that produced it had in contrast specified all the activities that they undertook. For this Comodi has to answer for the tax damages to the State. Already in 2012 the Court of Accounts has put her under scrutiny with Mignini, asking them if this expenditure was a justified expense, or a waste of public funds. And the enquiry by the Court of Accounts is still open. But there is something else very troubling: the production of the video was commissioned from the firm Nventa Ltd, of whom the sole administrator, Luigi Guadagno, is the brother of Raffaele Guadagno who works as secretary in the office of the Public Prosecutor of Perugia. ‘Thank you, but I don’t want to comment. I shall say only that in this matter each person assumes their own responsibility’ the Perugian magistrate said to Oggi. In the disciplinary proceedings (Comodi) will be defended by the ex-prosecutor of Mani Pulite (‘clean hands’), Piercamillo Davigo, currently counsellor to the Supreme Court.
A CYCLOPIAN INQUEST
This coming 15th January Giuliano Mignini goes on trial in Turin, with the ex-commissioner of police Michele Giuttari, for a series of crimes among which one that sticks out is abuse of office during the inquest into the death of the Perugian doctor Francesco Narducci, linked to the Monster of Florence case. An inquest contained in a good 100 folders, lasting for years, with 22 people implicated among whom was a superintendant, a colonel in the police, several noted lawyers and the then arrested journalist Mario Spezi. They were all absolved by the Judge of First Instance and by the Supreme Court. For this investigation in 2010 Mignini and Giuttari at Florence were condemned to one year and four months and a year and six months imprisonment (respectively), then the Appeal Court annulled the conviction for reasons of territorial incompetence. Thus the trial was transferred to
Turin. Even Giuliano Mignini, when we asked him how he was going to defend himself, was a bit terse and cryptic: ‘ I have no comment to make. Talk to someone who knows the story’. We wanted to ask if he, a magistrate, would waive the limitation period provided for in the first months of 2014, but could not do so.
In Perugia, the policewoman Monica Napoleoni, ex-head of the homicide section, and her colleagues Stefano Gubbiotti and Lorena Zugaroni, are being investigated for abuse of power and inducement to breach the reserved computer system; all of them were protagonists of the detention, interrogation and arrest of Amanda and Raffaele.
And in an inquiry at the preliminary hearing stage. the ex-vice-commander of the Prison Guards, of Perugia Raffaele Agiro is being investigated. He is accused of sexual assault and extortion against a prisoner who reported him after she had read Amanda’s account to a British newspaper. The American revealed the strange nocturnal visits of Agiro
who tried to make her confess and tormented her with insistent demands on her sexual habits. Last on the list, but also in what is for him serious trouble, is Carlo Pacelli, defense lawyer for Patrick Lumumba, who Knox unjustly placed at the scene of the crime. In his speeches he throws himself with great vehemence against Amanda, calling her ‘a witch’. Now, with his office colleague Sabrina Scaroni, arrested for stealing 300 thousand Euros of tax payment, he is being charged with untruthful defense, fraud and slander.
They are calling it the curse of Amanda.
.......................
meanwhile.....
In the Perugia house where Meredith was murdered, two Moroccan families this week (8 people in all) diced with death from carbon monoxide poisoning (they had an indoor barbeque!)

 

[yimyammer]

meanwhile.....
In the Perugia house where Meredith was murdered, two Moroccan families this week (8 people in all) diced with death from carbon monoxide poisoning (they had an indoor barbeque!)

what does this mean? Did a family die in the same house Meredith was killed in?

 

[Poppy1016]

The classical clues, as I know them, are: overly cooperative, or overly distressed. (over a more general period of time around discovery, not specifically before the finding of the body).

Overplaying of details may be present of this case. However, the suspicious behaviour of both Knox and Sollecito was perceived immediately, even by people who were not investigators (Luca, Filomena (I think it was them but might be Marco) for example, became so suspicious that they checked their car after they carried Knox and Sollecito on the back seat, thinking that they might have dumped some evidence item).

Do you think it was at all suspicious of Filomena to go into her room, thus disturbing a crime scene? As a matter of fact, I think Filomena may have staged the room.

 

[RandyN]

Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
I wonder if anybody did a careful search of the rock for signs of the paint that might have attached to it as it struck the white interior shutter where Hendry thinks it did. Hendry seems to discount the possibility that the rock hit the interior side of the exterior shutter but there is some damage there that he shows in the pictures in his article. If green pain could be found on the rock that would almost eliminate any possibility that the rock was thrown from the inside.
I think you mean if green paint is found on the rock then that would confirm the rock was thrown from inside. Which is good logic. But someone should ask the police and prosecutor when they plan to enter that evidence into the case then since so far they have done no such thing.

You fail to explain the shard of glass that is embedded into the white inner shutter. This OTOH is easily explained by Hendrys conclusion which can only be the correct one.

Unless we wish to suspend those troublesome laws of motion. Then sure anything is possible...unfortunately the prosecution failed to prove anything actually. Although they did present their share of could haves and maybes and possibly...which would get them tossed out of honest courts...but in Italy corruption and nonsense rules.

 

[RandyN]

what does this mean? Did a family die in the same house Meredith was killed in?

8 people apparently.

 

[Bill Williams]

Here is a picture of how the "back" deck at the cottage was open to the road, fully visible, with the street lamp in the foreground illuminating it...

 

[Bill Williams]

Compare with how the area immediately under Filomena's window is fullw sheltered from view from the street, and doesn't even face the street. Once the window is broken, it would take all of 15 seconds to secure entry, if that.

 

[moodstream]

But this is not enough for making it become a logical point of entry.
Statistics indicate that burglars would simply chose the easieast way. They don't chose a window simply because "an athletic guy would do it". They chose it insofar as it is the easiest way in or the safest way in.

Risk and difficulty of that window as entry point are incomparable to that of the rear balcony, so the real break-ins also show, the window also requires a bigger deal of work (you need first to climb to open the external shutters and check if the internal ones are closed, and they were, etc.) this work and concerns are all useless; but moreover there are further elements that make the whole operation less fit with that window, like the fact that the shutters were found half closed by the police.

Could be. IIRC a citizen of Perugia claimed he saw Guede at the Kabob stand flipping through statistical charts on viable entry points, sorted by ease of entrance, in a book called "Burglary for Dummies", so maybe your right.

On the other hand, maybe he was going to go in the easy way, but then, well, as the song says, he just got high and forgot.

 

[yimyammer]

8 people apparently.

Wow, that's unreal. How'd you like to be that landlord?

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

8 people apparently.

They "diced with death." I take that to mean they did something that could have been fatal, but wasn't.

 

[Dan O.]

No Moroccans died in the making of that news. Two families, (8 in all) in the upper and lower apartments, unemployed, their only source of heat a charcoal brazer, were hospitalized with carbon monoxide poisoning.

The hospital staff chipped in and bought them two new heaters (oil and electric), not understanding that the root problem is the inability to pay for fuel (apparently the gas to the cottage was shut off).

Local news found via Google [Perugia due famiglie marocchine avvelenamento da monossido di carbonio]

 

[Kaosium]

But you, you admit yourself that she was trivializing and downplaying the locked door, and that she was not expressing any urgency, insofar as you concede that "she may well have intended to be reassuring".

If she was reassuring, she was downplaying the locked door, and she was expressing that breaking down the door was not that urgent.

Sigh.

She displayed a sense of urgency as she became more concerned due to mounting evidence something was wrong. This included trying to see into the room, trying to get into it and summoning people with more authority such as the police and Filomena who was older and on the lease. However she didn't know what was behind that door and still thought it possible the worst hadn't happened because in her experience Meredith did indeed lock her door sometimes even when she didn't go home to England. She also says in that e-mail that once more people had gotten there she held back and let them handle it, feeling she'd done her part to raise the alarm.

In other words both were true at different times, she'd done things out of a sense of urgency and also tried to reassure herself and others that the worst wasn't the only possibility. That just means she's able to consider more than one possibility and change her mind given time to think about it and calm down. Those incapable of such mental gymnastics might find that suspicious but that's definitely more their fault than hers.