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

[Dan O.]

Guede's friend was sufficiently suspicious to report him to the police. (He must have had good reasons to be suspicious as we know that there are penalties for wrongly accusing a person.)

The Skype call was preceded by a chat probably an hour earlier. But both of these took place after Rudy was identified in the news media. I'm not seeing any hints in those conversations referencing earlier contacts since Rudy went on the run. Perhaps there is more in Giacomo's testimony.

 

[Strozzi]

-


-

Ok, I went and read the analysis, which wasn't much of an indepth analysis really, but anyway here is the list of wounds suffered by Meredith:

3 isolated bruises on the right side of the chin
2 isolated bruises on the left side of the chin
2 wounds under the left ear
3 small stab wounds near the neck crease line under the right ear
3 large stab wounds slightly left of the center of the chin

The number of the following wounds were not counted in the article so the number of each is not known (by me anyway), but it looks like there were (maybe) at least 27 all together including the ones in the chin area, but there may just have been as many as 40 wounds all total:

bruising to nose and lips
bruising on the inside of her lips and gums
shallow horizontal cut on left cheek
Rear scalp trauma
mid-upper right forearm
both elbows
hips
right leg
rotator cuff of the right shoulder
small superficial cuts on the hands

If there were any more wounds, I'm sure someone will fill in the blanks for me.

Even the original Medical Examiner (ME) or pathologist (Lalli) said all these wounds were consistent with one or more assailants.

Ron Hendry, at the end of the article, writes this:

"All told, the horrible injuries to Meredith Kercher were fully consistent with an assault by a strong man who swiftly overpowered her."

I gather Strozzi that this is where you got the idea that there was no struggle. Swiftly doesn't mean immediately and even Hendry says:

"The bruises on Meredith's elbows suggest strong handgrips during the struggle. Bruises on the legs and hips were probably caused by contact with furniture,"

which also told me that there was indeed a struggle and it might have been short as the attacker, after throwing her against the wall or furniture, then knocked her to the ground face first which could have caused the bruising of her nose, lips, and gums (and which also might have resulted in her going unconscious for a second or two). The attacker then yanked her head back by the scalp which caused the trauma to her rear scalp line.

Also, many wounds don't mean many attackers. Hell in my mind, the bruises to the elbows might have been caused by Meredith slamming one elbow (more than once) into the attackers hip instead of the stomach. This might have loosened the attackers grip of her other elbow just enough so she almost got away, but as she did, the attacker grabbed her forearm and slammed her against the wall which is what caused the bruising on the hips and knees and also the trauma to the rotator cuff (from the violent swing towards the wall and ground), then the attacker grabbed her by the elbow or forearm and slammed her against the ground knocking her unconscious for a second. Which gave the attacker time to grab her scalp with the left hand, pull the knife out of his pocket with the right and put it against her left cheek (hard enough to cut her and get her attention) and told her to stop struggling. When she continued to struggle, the attacker then put the knife under her chin (under the right ear) and as she continued to jerk her head, the knife was displaced three times leaving three cuts under her chin and when she still didn't stop struggling (she might have just been jerking her head away because of the pain of being cut); the attacker put the knife down, grabbed her violently by the chin and looked her in the eyes and told her to stop or he would kill her, and when she didn't, he pulled her hair back even harder, picked up the knife off the bed and stabbed her three times closer to the left of center of her chin. The third stab cut deep enough so he knew he had hit a major artery which is what caused her to slowly drown (suffocate) in her own blood for ten minutes, two of which were while she was still conscious.

The knife wounds are consistent with a right-handed attacker.

That's my take on the 40 wounds which are consistent with at least one attacker, and I really didn't see or read anything that proved absolutely that there were two or more attackers instead of one,

d

-

Let me point out a few things. In the heat of Rudy's attack, I don't believe that Rudy and Meredith were able to comprehend what the other may have said other than perhaps for a few words such as "stop", "knife". "don't". In tremendous fear, Meredith's brain may not have processed Rudy's rapidly or excitedly spoken Italian sounds into Italian words into English comprehension. Her Italian was rudimentary.

Secondly, in reading of the "wounds" to Meredith's body I see two types: knife wounds and bruise injuries.

The (40?) wounds are mostly bruises from being gripped tightly or knocked or banged into hard surfaces. The knife wounds are 3 very serious stabs and slices, 3 smaller stab wounds under the left ear, and additional scratches and knife pricks (hand defense).

The dynamics of Rudy's attack are described in detail in other sections of Hendry's report. They provide more information on the victim's wounds and injuries.

Meredith's father reportedly believes that there must have been multiple attackers because his daughter, who had practiced karate, otherwise would have fought more. Hendry concludes that the evidence is consistent with one strong male attacker armed with a knife who quickly controlled her from behind with one hand gripping her chin and the other holding a knife to her throat. Once she was stabbed in the throat, she was done for.

Hendry's analysis does not indicate a karate fight or judo match. Meredith did not almost "kick his ass" in spite of the karate moves she learned in a gym.

 

[Paninaro]

Can you explain why Lumumba was not sued by the police when Amanda and her parents are getting sued for talking about two cuffs?

It's hard to believe it was okay with the prosecutor that Lumumba said this: “They hit me over the head and yelled ‘dirty black’. Then they put handcuffs on me and shoved me out of the door, as Aleksandra pulled Davide away, screaming.”.....“I was questioned by five men and women, some of whom punched and kicked me. They forced me on my knees against the wall and said I should be in America where I would be given the electric chair for my crime. All they kept saying was, ‘You did it, you did it.’”

ETA: Never mind. I just figured out why no one wanted that story denied. It was supposed to show the damage Patrick suffered because of what Amanda did to him. Because what choice did the cops have but to treat him that way after Amanda falsely accused him?

I wouldn't doubt the prosecutor planted the story himself.

Using Lumumba as his proxy? Is that likely?

As I said, Hoyle confirmed to me in an e-mail that Lumumba indeed said the things she wrote in her article. So either Hoyle is lying or Lumumba was lying about what happened. I believe he later on said the police treated him alright.

If true, the story supports what Knox claimed about the mistreatment she received from the police. If after that Lumumba can't understand what kind of pressure Knox was put under during interrogation, he's once again not telling the truth.

Maybe Knox then should contact him asking him to clarify what really went down when the police brought him in for questioning, before paying him any damages.

 

[acbytesla]

I find it interesting reading the recent posts particularly the one by Briars expressing outrage and indignation over any mention of Meredith's lifestyle,

Her lifestyle would be entirely irrelevant if prosecutors hadn't painted a very misleading portrait of their imagined tension between Amanda and Meredith based on a difference of their lifestyles.

Mignini and everyone on the PGP have painted Amanda as a slut, a slacker and hygenically unclean. They have said that Amanda had some deep seated hatred toward Meredith.

These are the facts of the prosecution case. It has been used to justify incarcerating both Amanda and Raffaele for 4 years and two endless court cases. It has all been fodder for tabloid journalists not to mention crazy comments on their articles, facebook and other websites.

Supporters of Amanda have no desire to discuss Amanda's or Meredith's sex life or whether she always uses the brush on the toilet bowl. We know it has nothing to do with why Meredith was murdered.

We KNOW that the Amanda and Meredith were in the process of becoming friends. We know that they did things together, if they weren't friends after the month that they were roommates together, we know that they were on the road to becoming friends.

There is another truth. The prosecution couldn't find anything close to a motive. They have only made them up out of whole cloth. They didn't come close to proving any motive. Not the satanic ritual, or the jealousy, or that it Amanda was "stealing" Meredith's money, or a sex game gone awry, or that Meredith was a prissy prude who looked down on Meredith and her sexual exploration.

Briars may not like the fact that people mention that Meredith had a Brazilian wax job, and that she was having a casual sexual relationship with the pot grower downstairs. But all of this information destroys any idea that Meredith cared at all about Amanda being sexually involved with Raffaele or any other guy.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

<snip> This all leads me to wonder whether kids of this age, particularly young women, are mature enough to go off to a foreign country and live, essentially, on their own. I think that programs that involve some sort of dorm/family living, with a full-time program advisor/chaperone and formalized structure are a better choice. Definitely would have been better for both Ms. Kercher and Ms. Knox.

Interesting, my eldest daughter read the same degree as Meredith although she opted for French language, she was researching her year abroad when Meredith was murdered; the following year she flew out to Dakar, Senegal of all places spent 10 months made lifelong friends.

 

[Rolfe]

This sort of thing is very rare, and although it can sound callous, there's something to be said for the "better drowned than duffers" school of thought. You can't wrap a young adult in cotton wool forever.

Rolfe.

 

[Bill Williams]

I find it interesting reading the recent posts particularly the one by Briars expressing outrage and indignation over any mention of Meredith's lifestyle,

Her lifestyle would be entirely irrelevant if prosecutors hadn't painted a very misleading portrait of their imagined tension between Amanda and Meredith based on a difference of their lifestyles.

Mignini and everyone on the PGP have painted Amanda as a slut, a slacker and hygenically unclean. They have said that Amanda had some deep seated hatred toward Meredith.

It bears repeating - again and again if need be - that this puts PGP people who advance this at odds with even the convicting judge. I get the feeling that people don't bother to read Massei's 2010 motivations report.... except perhaps to read the parts where he pronounces them guilty.

For instance, some PGP (particularly the Meredith wiki guy) contradicts Massei on the order in which the 112 calls were made in relation to the arrival of the postal police. It is clear that Raffaele and Amanda had been slowly raising the alarm all morning, including 112 calls to Carabinieri, THEN the postals arrive...

...But this is the import of two other things Massei (in my view) finds as factual. I mean, if the argument is whether or not he literally "found it as factual" or not, then at least we're on the right side of the argument.... he did assume these two things related to acbytesla's post above....

.... Neither Raffaele nor Amanda had any psychopathology about them, and Meredith and Amanda's relationship was normal.

That's just the way Massei sees it. (The reason why no one can post cites from Massei to suggest the opposite is because there are none.)

Amanda "the slut and the slacker" was something the original prosecution, from the now-criminal Mignini, tried to slip into court, mainly through the British friends' testimony. It's the trouble I have with people who simply post the testimony of individuals, devoid the context.... being, here, a context that Massei did not believe that Mignini, the criminal, made his case. Meredith and Amanda enjoyed a normal friendship as housemates, and had completely normal, minor household tensions.

For those who buy into the new prosecutor's absurd theory of the pooh in the toilet inflamed household tensions to murder... the one thing you're doing is dismissing Massei's motivation's report. You're also portraying Meredith as something she was not - a vindictive, obsessive housecleaner, who'd take it out on the slob-slut American in the house, all the way to murder....

What Briars misses is that this fantasy build around the characters of both young women, is a huge disservice to Meredith - as well as her family.

 

[Bill Williams]

You are wrong.
There has been no conviction. There was a preliminary hearing on Jan 15th, on which 6 of the 7 charges from the original Florentine investigation were dropped.

3 of the charges (the most serious ones) were dropped because Mignini and Giuttari had proved their factual innocence in the first Florentine trial, innocence meanwhile had become definitive before the SC, and thus now they can't be tried again on those because of double jeopardy.

3 further charges were dropped on preliminar grounds without any assessment in the merit because the legal time period for investigation has expired. Giuttari and Mignini asked for the judge to consider the merits, but they knew the preliminary judge would likely be prevented from doing so. The Narducci investigation case is too complex to give an assessment in one hearing and investigative judges won't open investigations on charges which are time barred from the beginning.

1 charge has been sent to an ordinary judge for assessment, because it's the only one that on Jan 15th had not expired yet, and given the complexity of the case the preliminery judge, as said, could not give any assessment. The beaurocratic iter of this charge is anyway virtually dead too, because by the time a judge will come to assess it, it will be time-barred too, so even the lower court judge will likely refuse to consider it preliminarily.



There has been no trial. This is an invention, maybe by some of Spezi's lying journalist friends. And if you say Mignini has been found guilty of anything you are parroting a lie.

It's the reason I asked, Machiavelli, and thank you for your 2 cents worth.

What I am looking for is verification apart from you, and apart from my own sources. I trust you will correct me if I am wrong, but my sources tell me that:

- Nov 30 was the preliminary

- Jan 15 was the trial in which 3 of the four charges were "acquitted", please note this is also a word used by Andrea Vogt... so you should be correcting her, not me

- Mignini has been convicted on the fourth charge (Abuse of Office in relation to La Stampa wiretaps), or put more properly the conviction which was annulled last time due to lack of jurisdiction is now confirmed as a conviction

- March 18 is another trial (here's where you may be right.....) which I have assumed is the second grade trial

- the statute of limitations expires in the days prior to March 18

- if Mignini himself does nothing to set aside this statute then he becomes confirmed as convicted.​

So I could very well be wrong, but please note that so far the primary source to this is Andrea Vogt. You two may need to converse a bit behind the scenes to get your stories straight. Just saying.....

It's also telling that the reason even in your version why Mignini beat 3 of the charges was not because of his factual innocence, but because the time-limit passed. That's very convenient for someone who has his hands on the mechanisms of justice.... just saying....

 

[bri1]

Giacomo Silenzi is a guy who, it appears to me (i) did not treat Kercher respectfully/used her for sex, (ii) was into drugs somewhat seriously, (iii) hung around with at least one criminal, i.e., Rudy Guede, and (iv) looks like a jerk.

In short, Silenzi is what I would call a douche. A terrible choice for a boyfriend. I think that most fathers would recognize the type, and the threat, if their daughter ever came home with someone like this, and would attempt some sort of protective action. Well, at least I know that I would.

Now, there is another thing about douches like this. These people talk in order to make themselves look better, cooler, whatever. I believe that there is a substantial chance that this guy talked with his friends about his sexual exploits with Kercher. Indeed, one of the posts above makes it seem that the friends were aware of the anal sex. Rudy could have been, too.

Not only that, but it is certainly possible that Rudy knew from casual conversation with Silenzi or the other boys downstairs that their apartment would be vacant that weekend, and he could even have known the plans of the girls upstairs. He could have believed that the upstairs apartment was a good target for burglary, and maybe even a sexual attack.

In short, Kercher's vulnerability and death could be an unfortunate and unexpected function of her relationship with Silenzi, because he is a douche.

This all leads me to wonder whether kids of this age, particularly young women, are mature enough to go off to a foreign country and live, essentially, on their own. I think that programs that involve some sort of dorm/family living, with a full-time program advisor/chaperone and formalized structure are a better choice. Definitely would have been better for both Ms. Kercher and Ms. Knox.

Diocletus, I'd like to offer a different perspective here.
Regarding Giocomo: i) Treatment of Meredith- typical of guys at this age. Not nice, but typical. ii) There are lots of perfectly respectable people who smoke a lot. Growing your own can mean you want to avoid the riskiness of going to a dealer. iii) Rudy. A lot of students who live in shared accomodation have a bit more of an open door policy than individuals in their own homes. They played basketball with him. He came back to the house a few times. 999 out of 1000 times this kind of behaviour doesn't result in anything bad happening. iv) Hmmm.

Regarding maturity:you know you actually said that young women in particular are not mature enough to go and live and study independently abroad, right? It seems to me that your whole post was about how immature Silenzi was.... I think that women are lot more mature at this age than men (and this is from working as a warden in student halls for 3 years). They might be more vulnerable to crime, but that's a different issue, surely? That is a function of the immaturity and malice of men, not a function of their immaturity.
Lastly, these were both women who'd been living away from home for 2 years already. However, I do agree that more attention should be paid to safety for students.
And I also agree that men should be more careful about how they talk about women and sex in front of other men. With the prevalence of sexual violence against women, any talk which is interpretable as misogynistic could be part of a normalisation process, is to be deplored.

 

[Strozzi]

Yes, she does:

Regarding the report that Silenzi suggested to police that Amanda might have been involved, does anyone know how the police phrased their questions? Did they lead the witnesses to believe that the crime unfolded one way or another?

 

[Grinder]

The moderation appears to have altered 'history' but I think this may be referencing my comment last night. Sorry to be repetitive, but in essence I said that that Guede's friend was sufficiently suspicious to report him to the police. (He must have had good reasons to be suspicious as we know that there are penalties for wrongly accusing a person.) This enabled the police to identify the palm print as they were able to reference the palm print on record for Guede. He co-operated in the recording of the Skype conversation in which Guede admitted his presence. Unfortunately because of Guede's abbreviated trial he never seems to have given evidence, he must have had good reasons for thinking Guede was guilty of the murder of AK.It would be interesting to know those. If I was a journalist I would be pursuing an interview with him. He reported Guede as guilty not Guede plus others.

You sure they hadn't matched the palm print first? It is interesting how few interviews were done with many of those involved in the case.

Using Lumumba as his proxy? Is that likely?

As I said, Hoyle confirmed to me in an e-mail that Lumumba indeed said the things she wrote in her article. So either Hoyle is lying or Lumumba was lying about what happened. I believe he later on said the police treated him alright.

If true, the story supports what Knox claimed about the mistreatment she received from the police. If after that Lumumba can't understand what kind of pressure Knox was put under during interrogation, he's once again not telling the truth.

Maybe Knox then should contact him asking him to clarify what really went down when the police brought him in for questioning, before paying him any damages.

Hard to believe he lied to Hoyle but understandable why he recanted on TV. Would love to hear why he wasn't charged with a crime for accusing the Flying Squad of criminally abusing him. Mach?

It bears repeating - again and again if need be - that this puts PGP people who advance this at odds with even the convicting judge. I get the feeling that people don't bother to read Massei's 2010 motivations report.... except perhaps to read the parts where he pronounces them guilty.

Yes we know you think this but everyone but you disagreed with Hellmann's calumnia verdict. I think that Hellmann's explanation of Rudy's shoe flying off during the murder is ridiculous but still agree with his not guilty verdict.

For instance, some PGP (particularly the Meredith wiki guy) contradicts Massei on the order in which the 112 calls were made in relation to the arrival of the postal police. It is clear that Raffaele and Amanda had been slowly raising the alarm all morning, including 112 calls to Carabinieri, THEN the postals arrive...

There was an issue brought up during the trial. It was never the crucial issue for most because there was no doubt they had alerted Filomena long before the PP arrived. Battistelli is given the attribution in Massei of saying the kids told him they had called. The PGP have done their own prosecution just like the PIP have done their own defense.

... Neither Raffaele nor Amanda had any psychopathology about them, and Meredith and Amanda's relationship was normal.

That's just the way Massei sees it. (The reason why no one can post cites from Massei to suggest the opposite is because there are none.)

And some PGP disagree with him. It just isn't a big deal. The PGP would say Massei was just being nice to the kids.

Amanda "the slut and the slacker" was something the original prosecution, from the now-criminal Mignini, tried to slip into court, mainly through the British friends' testimony. It's the trouble I have with people who simply post the testimony of individuals, devoid the context.... being, here, a context that Massei did not believe that Mignini, the criminal, made his case. Meredith and Amanda enjoyed a normal friendship as housemates, and had completely normal, minor household tensions.

It would appear that Mignini is not a criminal under the law. I believe that Hellmann said he approved of how the prosecution had proceeded.

For those who buy into the new prosecutor's absurd theory of the pooh in the toilet inflamed household tensions to murder... the one thing you're doing is dismissing Massei's motivation's report. You're also portraying Meredith as something she was not - a vindictive, obsessive housecleaner, who'd take it out on the slob-slut American in the house, all the way to murder....

Maybe he is just demonstrating that motive isn't important or necessary. I would vote to convict every time without motive if the evidence was solid. "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!"

What Briars misses is that this fantasy build around the characters of both young women, is a huge disservice to Meredith - as well as her family.

Yes it is.

To me Massei is only useful for recounting of facts and testimony. I didn't agree with his verdict nor do I care about his narrative.

 

[Bill Williams]

Andrea Vogt FINALLY gets some ink. The problem is that this piece contains guilter factoids - meaning, they just aren't true.

Wishing them to be true and building strawmen, and then building theories on top of the factoids does not make the theories true either.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/europe/amanda-knox/56894/amanda-knoxs-fugitive-fears-shes-right-be-worried

Andrea cannot stop herself from putting words into the mouth of the invented character of "Foxy Knoxy".

The weasel words in this supposed non-opinion piece (!) are highlighted in yellow....

It didn’t help that Knox ignored her lawyers’ pleas to travel from Seattle and attend court in Florence - she sent an email instead - nor that she repeatedly requested to meet the Kerchers, only to be sternly rebutted by their lawyer, who suggested she act more like a defendant.

Then she started a new blog and began blithely responding to comments – most recently posting an admission that she had once faked a break-in as an April Fool’s prank before she left for Italy (a staged burglary is a key part of the case against her).

Have the wheels come off Knox’s public relations machine now that she’s safe in Seattle?

Note the use of weasel words and strawmen. There was no "public relations machine", yet Vogt can use that strawman to suggest something else, building falsehood on falsehood. Sigh.

 

[RoseMontague]

Using Lumumba as his proxy? Is that likely?

As I said, Hoyle confirmed to me in an e-mail that Lumumba indeed said the things she wrote in her article. So either Hoyle is lying or Lumumba was lying about what happened. I believe he later on said the police treated him alright.

If true, the story supports what Knox claimed about the mistreatment she received from the police. If after that Lumumba can't understand what kind of pressure Knox was put under during interrogation, he's once again not telling the truth.

Maybe Knox then should contact him asking him to clarify what really went down when the police brought him in for questioning, before paying him any damages.

I think what it demonstrates is that Patrick will say anything that he thinks will garner him money. He got money for a sensational interview, so he gave them a sensational story. He made up some friction with Amanda and between Amanda and Meredith because he thinks it will help his civil case.

Give him enough money and he will say whatever you want him to say. And then change it back to something else that might get him more money.

 

[Bill Williams]

Maybe he is just demonstrating that motive isn't important or necessary. I would vote to convict every time without motive if the evidence was solid. "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!"

If that's the case, there is plenty of opportunity for the lead-judges to say so in their motivations reports.

I agree, motive is not essential, especially if everything else is solid. For my own mileage, though, it is telling that so far all the prosecutors and judges have made a bit deal of motive, sans the rider you'd like them to put in - that perhaps all this is secondary... the judges seem to think it's important enough to form the basis of understanding why they're advancing a guilty scenario....

... and then the guilters run around after saying, "well it's not that important to begin with." Guilters picking fights with PIP over this are picking fights with the wrong people!

To me Massei is only useful for recounting of facts and testimony. I didn't agree with his verdict nor do I care about his narrative.

A bit of a non sequitor if you don't mind me saying... and the "facts" that Massei outlines are about his version of motive, psychopathology, friendship between Meredith/Amanda, timing of 112 calls, etc. etc. which is exactly what we're talking about.

The reason I do not really care for his narrative is that it does not add up, and is based on probablies... one of which is the transport of the knife. Amanda probably transported the knife for her own personal protection - which is a stunning "probably" to find, because all other guilters say it was transported as part of premeditation. Massei does not believe in premeditation.....

.... and therefore has to propose a ludicrous, evidenceless method of transport for the knife. It's for reasons such as this that his "narrative" does not work. There are dozens of other examples.

 

[acbytesla]

This all leads me to wonder whether kids of this age, particularly young women, are mature enough to go off to a foreign country and live, essentially, on their own. I think that programs that involve some sort of dorm/family living, with a full-time program advisor/chaperone and formalized structure are a better choice. Definitely would have been better for both Ms. Kercher and Ms. Knox.

There are douche bags close to home I assure you Diocletus. The number of "date rapes" at colleges are almost staggering so sending your kids to a college across town has its perils.

At some time, you have to let go of your children and trust them to make good decisions. And you can't protect them from every bad thing that is going to happen to them in life. You can only hope that you have prepared them to deal with those bad things. (Not that you can ever really prepare your child from getting murdered in her apartment).

 

[RoseMontague]

Interesting that the filthy rotten corrupt Mignini uses double jeopardy and the statute of limitations to weasel out of his criminal actions by the same system that has kept Sabrina and Cosima in jail now 9 months after the first railroad job trial without a motivation report. As this article points out the ISC has twice now indicated the prosecution had failed to show serious signs of guilt. Perhaps there is a chance then that the preventive detention will be lifted. Or maybe not. Probably depends on who you know.

http://www.lastampa.it/2014/01/14/i...na-misseri-ZCIW8OpFJPX2hxlGdW3oDK/pagina.html

 

[acbytesla]

Amanda "the slut and the slacker" was something the original prosecution, from the now-criminal Mignini, tried to slip into court, mainly through the British friends' testimony. It's the trouble I have with people who simply post the testimony of individuals, devoid the context.... being, here, a context that Massei did not believe that Mignini, the criminal, made his case. Meredith and Amanda enjoyed a normal friendship as housemates, and had completely normal, minor household tensions.

For those who buy into the new prosecutor's absurd theory of the pooh in the toilet inflamed household tensions to murder... the one thing you're doing is dismissing Massei's motivation's report. You're also portraying Meredith as something she was not - a vindictive, obsessive housecleaner, who'd take it out on the slob-slut American in the house, all the way to murder....

What Briars misses is that this fantasy build around the characters of both young women, is a huge disservice to Meredith - as well as her family.

The problem is that there is no evidence really to support the prosecutor's and PGP theories and Massei recognize that, but then made up his own motive theory which basically had Amanda and Raffaele doing this as some kind of momentary lapse into evil.

There are a lot of people, even members of the PIP that expect the Florence court to somehow uphold the moronic ISC review of the case. I don't blame them for being pessimistic, I've felt that way as well.

But I have to seriously wonder how they can do that given that the only real new evidence doesn't add any evidence that points to guilt. Add the RIS's report on the evidence combined with the analyst that testified, it all adds up to innocent.

Let's find out if they follow the evidence or the ISC.

That is the question.

 

[LondonJohn]

If all posters on this forums at once declare now that they don't belive Lumumba was ever mistreated by the police as teh Daily Mail says, then I will "learn" it.

Otherwise, I will think that you decide to believe the Daily Mail rather selectively.

Nonsense. There is a world of difference between the two types of story that are being referred to here. Yes, both appeared in the Mail, but that's where the similarity ends.

The "Seattle party riot" story was a classic piece of tabloid dirt-digging on a person who was in police custody accused of a heinous murder. It contained numerous unattributed quotes from dubious sources, and was extremely legally safe for the Mail, since it did not name any of the alleged miscreants, and since the behaviour described was more boisterous than criminal in nature. And even if it had indirectly accused Knox directly in relation to this party, the Mail was safe in the knowledge that people behind bars awaiting a murder trial tend to find it.....ermmmm....... difficult - both logistically and reputationally - to launch a libel action.

On the other hand, the Lumumba arrest story was completely different. This story contained direct quotes that were attributed to Lumumba himself, in which he accused the Perugia police of serious malpractice and criminal acts - including physical and racial abuse. In this instance, the accused parties were the authorities, and they were accused in explicit and direct terms. The Mail would therefore have been hugely aware of the possible consequences of getting this story wrong, and would never (in my opinion) have run the story without being cast-iron certain that they had Lumumba's words on tape as unimpeachable evidence.

So I can only conclude that in this second case, the Mail cannot be guilty of inventing - or even "sexing up" - the story about Lumumba's abuse at the hands of the police. Rather, I can only conclude that Lumumba must have said those exact words to the Mail reporter, and that therefore the only two possible options are these: 1) Lumumba told the Mail the truth, or 2) Lumumba told the Mail lies or exaggerations.

But if it's option 2, then one has to ask why Lumumba would be motivated to make such grave accusations against the police in the knowledge that they were false. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that making serious false accusations against the authorities is not exactly a great idea under any circumstances, and that only bad things could result for Lumumba from such a move. I therefore posit that it's more likely that Lumumba did indeed tell the truth. The other thing in favour of it being the truth is the level of detail in the allegations.

I point out btw that Knox supporters were calling the April fool prank story "a lie" for years, until a week ago.

It was a lie, in its distorted and exaggerated form. What's more, neither Knox nor anyone else was under any sort of obligation to correct the story.


Counterexample:

Mr X says to Mr Y: "You slept with my wife".

Mr Y says: "No I didn't". Mr Y is telling the truth.

Some years later, Mr Y says to Mr X: "Well, all those years ago, I didn't sleep with your wife, but I did kiss her briefly on the mouth when we were both drunk at a party".

 

[LondonJohn]

With due respect you seem to grossly ignore the implication of physical evidence related to the autopsy. You called Meredith's assault a "brief confrontation". You simply ignore the existence of a whole pattern of injuries.

Then you also sweep away the needed explanation of other evidence, like the blood traces in bathroom and bathmat, modus operandi etc.

The problem is that your reasoning is the following: you place a Guede-alone scenario as axiome, and the rest gets rationalized upon it in the most vague and improbable and unfounded ways, or ignored.

This simply is a lie.

There is no "whole pattern of injuries at all". There were numerous small marks on Meredith's body, but I'd contend that some of these most likely weren't even related to the attack/murder at all. A slight young woman, having had a large amount to drink, jostling and getting jostled in crowded bars, tends to pick up small bruises and marks.

In fact, the autopsy report is notable for stating that there were very few bruises or marks in many of the key areas of the body, including most of the face, the torso, the upper arms and the pelvic area. In fact, outside of the obvious bruising round the mouth and neck, and some minor evidence of hand restraint, there is no evidence to suggest that Meredith was involved in any kind of lengthy physical assault - and far less is there any evidence to suggest that this has to have been the work of more than one attacker.

In fact, the evidence is all entirely consistent with a scenario where Guede, acting alone, was involved in a brief initial struggle with Meredith, after which he subdued her into compliance with his knife and with threatening words/actions, such that he made her (with his knife pressed to her throat) get into an all-fours position, then initiated a sexual assault, then stabbed her when she resisted. And the evidence (and lack of evidence) suggests that all of this happened in a matter of minutes at most.

 

[AmyStrange]

Let me point out a few things. In the heat of Rudy's attack, I don't believe that Rudy and Meredith were able to comprehend what the other may have said other than perhaps for a few words such as "stop", "knife". "don't". In tremendous fear, Meredith's brain may not have processed Rudy's rapidly or excitedly spoken Italian sounds into Italian words into English comprehension. Her Italian was rudimentary.

Secondly, in reading of the "wounds" to Meredith's body I see two types: knife wounds and bruise injuries.

The (40?) wounds are mostly bruises from being gripped tightly or knocked or banged into hard surfaces. The knife wounds are 3 very serious stabs and slices, 3 smaller stab wounds under the left ear, and additional scratches and knife pricks (hand defense).

The dynamics of Rudy's attack are described in detail in other sections of Hendry's report. They provide more information on the victim's wounds and injuries.

Meredith's father reportedly believes that there must have been multiple attackers because his daughter, who had practiced karate, otherwise would have fought more. Hendry concludes that the evidence is consistent with one strong male attacker armed with a knife who quickly controlled her from behind with one hand gripping her chin and the other holding a knife to her throat. Once she was stabbed in the throat, she was done for.

Hendry's analysis does not indicate a karate fight or judo match. Meredith did not almost "kick his ass" in spite of the karate moves she learned in a gym.

-

Although I agree with most of your (or Hendry's) speculative analysis, I never wrote she used karate or judo to kick her attacker's ass. She might have elbowed him enough to get free for a second. That is quite possible and using the elbow for defense is also taught in Karate.

My original post was merely used to explain that her almost kicking her attacker's ass was more probable than Amanda standing outside the room directing Rudy and Raffaele.
Besides, my above analysis of the 40 wounds was to show a single attacker was possible and that was it. I wasn't trying to prove she almost kicked her attacker's ass. Come on Strozzi, what exactly are you arguing with me about?

d

-