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

[LondonJohn]

Well, no, no she wouldn't know that, having not known Meredith for more than a few 'cycles'. A heavy cycle can produce a lot more blood than a normal one.

Also, Merediths complaints about Knox's habits do not preclude having dirty habits of her own.

Also- so what if Knox knew it wasn't "normal for Meredith"?

That doesn't allow for the dismissal of the idea that it could have been Merediths menstrual blood - absent of all other reasonable assumptions. Under the innocence scenario, Knox does not have any information that makes any other assumption more reasonable than the assumption she claims to have made.

Knox simply has to make the assumption that Meredith was going to clean it up later - which would be entirely compatible with what you claim she is supposed to have assumed about Merediths norms and habituation.

There is simply no reason for an innocent Knox to assume an indeterminate patch of blood on a mat is indication of anything untoward - especially given the complete and total absence of any preceeding indication of any other reasonable option.

Yes.

The other important point is that the blood on the bath mat was very clearly highly diluted. It would therefore not be unreasonable (in my opinion) for Knox to have thought that Meredith might have taken a shower during a time of heavy flow, had dripped blood onto the wet shower pan (even after having turned off the shower), and had then inadvertently stepped in the blood and stepped out onto the mat.

Had the prints and the other blood marks been in dark, heavy blood, then I think the situation would have been rather different: for one thing, that would imply a significant loss of blood in any case; and for another thing, it would be most unusual for a menstruating woman to ever encounter a scenario where she was stepping into a pool of her own menstrual blood.

I therefore think that it would indeed have been strange for Knox to attribute heavy, dark, undiluted blood marks on the bath mat as a menstruation accident. But that was not the nature of the blood on the mat.

 

[Dan O.]

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

Antonia Hoyle describes herself as a freelance journalist so there is less incentive for the Mail to protect her.

 

[LondonJohn]

-


-

Exactly. Thank you Mary for that added insight,

d

ETA: Also, Sharon Tate's murderer (Susan Atkins by herself, for example) stabbed Sharon multiple times (around 30 or more times); so once again, multiple wounds don't always mean multiple attackers.
-

Yes.

And people such as Dennis Rader (the BTK killer) managed to control and corral entire families while he tied them up. He evidently used a handgun for control in at least some of the incidents, but the underlying principles are the same as for a man controlling a single slight woman using a large menacing knife.

Anyone who doubts that Guede could have established non-physical domination over Meredith Kercher - given the fact that he had a deadly weapon in his hands, was by far stronger and larger than Meredith, and was the aggressor - knows very little about basic human psychology (or is too hopelessly biased against Knox/Sollecito to give this matter proper evaluation). Many people seem to be using flawed thinking based on the post-hoc knowledge that Meredith was murdered. "How" (they might say) "would someone NOT fight back in that scenario?".

But that's to misunderstand the critical point: Meredith Kercher almost certainly did not think that this situation was going to culminate in her murder.In fact, it's almost certain that she felt - either intuitively, or because Guede gave her some sort of false indication - that if she complied then she was far less likely to come to physical harm.

 

[LondonJohn]

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.

Do you think that it's a healthy criminal justice system where charges are routinely allowed to disappear purely on a time basis?

Do you think that it's a healthy criminal justice system where certain privileged individuals appear to be able to *ahem* manipulate the system to take charges beyond their expiration period?

Do you think that, instead, a healthy criminal justice system should easily be capable of trying charges on their merits in a timely, efficient and fair manner?

Do you think that the Italian criminal justice system is currently unfit for purpose?

 

[Mary_H]

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.

All in all, Perugia sounds like a potential cesspool. It's no surprise PLE felt they had to get the crime cleaned up as soon as possible.

In “Angel Face,” Barbie Nadeau wrote,

Perugia is also a drug dealer’s paradise; the mostly North African merchants do a lively trade in everything from genetically modified hashish to cocaine and acid. It is very easy to get high in Perugia, and the police generally turn a blind eye. Perugia has a very low crime rate compared with the rest of Italy. Despite its reputation, drug arrests are rare, and the police are routinely lenient with the student population. The narrow, cobbled streets, some of which are built in steps, discourage car use, so the students stagger around the city center on foot, and the drunk driving offenses that usually dominate college-town crime dockets are not a problem.

This article,“Students flock to Perugia a year after Kercher killing,” said,

Perugia’s army of drug dealers have turned the town into central Italy's biggest cocaine, heroin and marijuana outlet, even recruiting well-to-do students as pushers.

The website, “Perugia tourist information and main sights,” says,

The large student population has, unfortunately, attracted drug dealers, the town centre being dominated by north Africans and the outskirts by Nigerians, with overall control being in the hands of the Calabrian 'Ndrangheta. The presence of drug wholesalers in turn attracts addicts, giving Perugia the highest rate of drug overdose deaths per capita in Italy.

 

[LondonJohn]

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.

Exactly.

Heck, the main cause of death among 16-21 year olds in the UK is motor vehicle accidents (whether as a driver/occupant or a pedestrian). But obviously no sane parent should be driving a child in this age group around all the time, nor chaperoning them as pedestrians. The best (and most) thing a parent can do is try to instil in the child the importance of driving safely, of not being a passenger in cars that are being driven unsafely, and to take care when walking near main roads.

 

[LondonJohn]

Antonia Hoyle describes herself as a freelance journalist so there is less incentive for the Mail to protect her.

As the publisher, the Mail would have been directly in the firing line - from Lumumba and the police - if this story had been incorrect. It's really somewhat irrelevant as to whether the reporter was staff or freelance.

The bottom line is this: the Mail simply would not have allowed this story to run without cast-iron certainty that Lumumba had said exactly those words (or their exact Italian equivalent). The Legal department of the Mail would, without a shadow of a doubt, have requested proof that Lumumba's words were on tape and that they were reported exactly as spoken.

 

[Diocletus]

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.

Well, I think the post was about how Silenzi wasn't a good choice for a boyfriend, and the (not specifically foreseeable) consequence of this choice, under the circumstances of this case, was death.

I agree 100% that young women of this age are generally more mature, and might be better suited to studying abroad independently . . . if not for the fact that they are also more likely to be viewed as targets of opportunity by people like Rudy Guede (strictly speaking, maybe this isn't a "maturity" issue). I also think that there are exceptions to the general rule, and that even some women of this age are not ready to make every choice on their own without some advice.

Perugia seems to me like a dangerous place to be on your own, more dangerous than study at the Universities of Washington or Leeds if you are a foreigner. These young women were making their own decisions about partying, friends, accommodation, security, etc. That's all well and good, but in this case it ended in death, and it was a death the was preventable.

 

[Mary_H]

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.

The thing about this article and the Kate Mansey article is that both of them are too pat -- they convey the prosecution's message too precisely. Tabloid writers zero in on the most attractive gold nuggets of gossip and then embellish them, because they know that's what people want to read about.

It is probable the police abused Lumumba, but I don't understand how anyone can accept the second part of the article when the first part is so obviously false. Lumumba didn't think any of those things about Amanda, he wasn't planning to fire her, and I don't think Meredith ever went into his dark, dank, scuzzy hole-in-the-wall full of old drunks. It was not a nice bar for students.

I also think it is very unlikely that being a black immigrant in Italy, Lumumba would take the chance of revealing what happened to him when the police took him in. He very easily could have wound up dead for that.

Finally, before they were arrested, Patrick and Amanda talked and, if I remember correctly, he asked her if she thought his English was good enough that he should accept the interview requests he was getting, and she told him she didn't think so. Someone should ask Antonia who her translator was.

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.<snip>

This is an excellent point.

 

[Antony]

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.

I think it's a stretch to imagine that Patrick would make up accusations of police abuse, or that the Daily Mail (probably the most pro-police of all the UK newspapers) would encourage him to do so. His story was sensational enough without them. Not only that, it's rather unlikely that this police force would have treated him correctly (given that they believed him to be the murderer and did not expect him to be free to give press interviews any time soon) and then withheld the video recording of his interrogation, on top of the missing recordings of the AK and RS interviews. The missing recordings tell us that the story of physical and racial abuse is true, just as they tell us that Amanda's account of slaps to the head is true.

OTOH, he would have every reason to make up stories against Amanda, given that believed he had every reason to make war on her and that the DM was only too keen to jump on the character assassination bandwagon that was already in full cry.

Furthermore, he would have every reason to back off from his accusations once he was faced with the reality of police powers against him, even when he was cleared of any part in the murder.

In summary,

• Patrick lying about police maltreatment - unlikely;
• DM misquoting Patrick on abuse accusations - unlikely;
• Police actually mistreating Patrick - highly likely;
• Prosecutor calculating that it wasn't worth challenging the DM article because police actions would be blamed on Amanda - fits with all of their excuses about the false arrests.

 

[Diocletus]

Exactly.

Heck, the main cause of death among 16-21 year olds in the UK is motor vehicle accidents (whether as a driver/occupant or a pedestrian). But obviously no sane parent should be driving a child in this age group around all the time, nor chaperoning them as pedestrians. The best (and most) thing a parent can do is try to instil in the child the importance of driving safely, of not being a passenger in cars that are being driven unsafely, and to take care when walking near main roads.

Yes, well, the first day the kid gets her license, you don't necessarily send her up on the highway, or have her driving late at night, or driving clear across the country.

 

[Bill Williams]

Do you think that it's a healthy criminal justice system where charges are routinely allowed to disappear purely on a time basis?

Do you think that it's a healthy criminal justice system where certain privileged individuals appear to be able to *ahem* manipulate the system to take charges beyond their expiration period?

Do you think that, instead, a healthy criminal justice system should easily be capable of trying charges on their merits in a timely, efficient and fair manner?

Do you think that the Italian criminal justice system is currently unfit for purpose?

Double negative alert! - I want it said that (particularly after all the dustups we've had here) I don't necessarily disbelieve Machiavelli's version of what just happened to Mignini.

There's simply a paucity of information out there.... someone is certainly keeping this quiet! Machiavelli could very well be right that Jan 15 was the preliminary hearing..... my information was that Nov 30 was the prelim, and Jan 15 was the trial; and, heck, even Andrea Vogt used the term "acquitted" when it comes to describing the 3 Abuse of Office charges against (that criminal) Mignini that, "simply went away!"

But there's that pesky fourth charge. Let me try this on for size, assuming that even Machiavelli is correct, that the Jan 15 hearing was the Italian equivalent to a preliminary hearing, to set something over for trial.

The 4th charge relates to the La Stampa journalist who'd been illegally wiretapped - Mignini was convicted for Abuse of Office for that in Florence way, way back when. The conviction was "set aside" because of lack of jurisdiction, and it was up to the (Turin?) prosecutor whether or not to revive the prosecution in (Turin?).

My sources tell me that Mignini remains convicted of this charge on the merit of what happened on Jan 15, 2014, regardless of whether I'm right or if Machiavelli is right.

The catch is this. The statute of limitations on this fourth charge runs out just days before the March 18 hearing, regardless of whether that is a trial or not. Here's the deal - if Mignini doesn't wave the statute of limitation and allow the trial to take place, he stands convicted, as if the Florence conviction was valid, esp. now that it has been brought by the right jurisdiction in (Turin?). Now that the jurisdiction issue is settled, mete and right - the Florence decision now, apparently, stands.

Machiavelli might want to comment on this, too - esp. if he disagrees.

Apparently, as of yesterday, IMO Mignini is a convicted criminal. If I am wrong, I am sure someone will demonstrate why!

So, if this is true, the whole Kercher murder case saga was prosecuted by someone fighting for his own liberty; potentially, there was a criminal prosecuting two innocents.

He was a criminal using the horrible Kercher murder to somehow deflect attention from the Monster of Florence stuff that Spezi revealed. No wonder Mignini goes after Spezi even more vehemently than anything to do with the Kercher prosecutions.

I'd like to be shown why this statement is wrong. At the end of the day, it is the Kercher family who've been used through all this.

 

[Strozzi]

-

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?

dH

-

I didn't think I was arguing with you (or anyone else) on this.

I thought the earlier statement that Meredith "almost kicked his ass" was hyperbole and wishful thinking (we all would wish it had turned out that way).

On a related subject not related to your comments, allow me to address the quantity of bruises. I believe that Rudy grabbing Meredith hard on arms or wrists or wrapping his arms around her torso as she squirmed mightly to break free can leave a number of grip bruises on Meredith's arms, wrists, torse, etc. in just a few seconds. 40 wounds (perhaps 30 of them bruises) doesn't mean protracted struggle if 4 or 5 different bruises can be inflicted in a burst of just a few seconds.

 

[acbytesla]

Well, I think the post was about how Silenzi wasn't a good choice for a boyfriend, and the (not specifically foreseeable) consequence of this choice, under the circumstances of this case, was death.

I agree 100% that young women of this age are generally more mature, and might be better suited to studying abroad independently . . . if not for the fact that they are also more likely to be viewed as targets of opportunity by people like Rudy Guede (strictly speaking, maybe this isn't a "maturity" issue). I also think that there are exceptions to the general rule, and that even some women of this age are not ready to make every choice on their own without some advice.

Perugia seems to me like a dangerous place to be on your own, more dangerous than study at the Universities of Washington or Leeds if you are a foreigner. These young women were making their own decisions about partying, friends, accommodation, security, etc. That's all well and good, but in this case it ended in death, and it was a death the was preventable.

I wish that was true Diocletus. The University of Washington is smack in the middle of the city of Seattle. There is actually quite a bit of crime in the U-District. There are assaults, rapes, burglaries and actually more of these crimes in that area than in the rest of the city. Ted Bundy, the famous serial killer actually kidnapped a woman from the U-District and killed her. But Seattle overall has a fairly low crime rate.

I have no idea how the crime rate in and around the University of Washington compares to Perugia, but I really doubt that Perugia is a lot less.

I don't really blame Perugia for Meredith's murder, although I do blame it for it's very poor investigation and the witch hunt that followed.

 

[Mary_H]

I think it's a stretch to imagine that Patrick would make up accusations of police abuse, or that the Daily Mail (probably the most pro-police of all the UK newspapers) would encourage him to do so. His story was sensational enough without them. Not only that, it's rather unlikely that this police force would have treated him correctly (given that they believed him to be the murderer and did not expect him to be free to give press interviews any time soon) and then withheld the video recording of his interrogation, on top of the missing recordings of the AK and RS interviews. The missing recordings tell us that the story of physical and racial abuse is true, just as they tell us that Amanda's account of slaps to the head is true.

OTOH, he would have every reason to make up stories against Amanda, given that believed he had every reason to make war on her and that the DM was only too keen to jump on the character assassination bandwagon that was already in full cry.

Furthermore, he would have every reason to back off from his accusations once he was faced with the reality of police powers against him, even when he was cleared of any part in the murder.

In summary,

• Patrick lying about police maltreatment - unlikely;
• DM misquoting Patrick on abuse accusations - unlikely;
• Police actually mistreating Patrick - highly likely;
• Prosecutor calculating that it wasn't worth challenging the DM article because police actions would be blamed on Amanda - fits with all of their excuses about the false arrests.

I find the idea that the police allowed Patrick to talk to the press at all very unlikely. I can't find the date of the article right now, but it was fairly shortly after Patrick was released. There is no way they were just letting him go about his business, blabbing about what had happened to him in police custody.

There is so much we don't know in order to be able to corroborate this. Everyone says Patrick retracted the allegations on TV, but did anyone actually see the TV show? Patrick sued the cops for false arrest -- what do the trial documents say? Did he also allege mistreatment, which most certainly happened? If not, why not, when he allegedly had said it to The Mail?

The prosecution had to put its stamp of approval on everything in those days. They either gave the story to the writer or let her keep it because it benefitted their case against Amanda. If Patrick said it, he made an agreement with the police to take it back in exchange for coming over to their side of the case. But I don't think he was interviewed at all.

 

[Diocletus]

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.

Congrats, I think your daughter must fit into the mature, in the alternative, lucky category. But I have to ask, did you just sign her up for any old program and send her on her way?

 

[Diocletus]

I wish that was true Diocletus. The University of Washington is smack in the middle of the city of Seattle. There is actually quite a bit of crime in the U-District. There are assaults, rapes, burglaries and actually more of these crimes in that area than in the rest of the city. Ted Bundy, the famous serial killer actually kidnapped a woman from the U-District and killed her. But Seattle overall has a fairly low crime rate.

I have no idea how the crime rate in and around the University of Washington compares to Perugia, but I really doubt that Perugia is a lot less.

I don't really blame Perugia for Meredith's murder, although I do blame it for it's very poor investigation and the witch hunt that followed.

I'm sure that's true. But I said that it the U is safer than going to Perugia as a foreigner. Amanda would have understood how to navigate Seattle, and Meredith would have understood how to navigate Leeds. Perugia was a different place.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>I have no idea how the crime rate in and around the University of Washington compares to Perugia, but I really doubt that Perugia is a lot less.

I don't really blame Perugia for Meredith's murder, although I do blame it for it's very poor investigation and the witch hunt that followed.

According to Barbie Nadeau, Perugia has a lot of crime, but few arrests, which fits with what we have observed about Rudy.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9769258&postcount=2685

 

[AmyStrange]

I didn't think I was arguing with you (or anyone else) on this.

I thought the earlier statement that Meredith "almost kicked his ass" was hyperbole and wishful thinking (we all would wish it had turned out that way).

On a related subject not related to your comments, allow me to address the quantity of bruises. I believe that Rudy grabbing Meredith hard on arms or wrists or wrapping his arms around her torso as she squirmed mightly to break free can leave a number of grip bruises on Meredith's arms, wrists, torse, etc. in just a few seconds. 40 wounds (perhaps 30 of them bruises) doesn't mean protracted struggle if 4 or 5 different bruises can be inflicted in a burst of just a few seconds.

-

You make some good points about the protracted struggle (I never said it was protracted, a lot can happen in a five or ten second fight) and what you say could have happened, but there was no bruising around her waist, or wrist, but there was bruising to her hips, elbows and upper right forearm, so it's quite possible you are right.

Remember though that at some point the knife has to be introduced and where is the attacker keeping it? In his hand while he has his arms wrapped around her waist? It's possible, but also very awkward and feeds into the two attacker theory, because that's more believable than that he held it while she and he struggled mightily.

I believe (but this is my opinion) that some how he knocked her in the face somehow (when he slammed her around the room or onto the floor) causing her to become unconscious or slightly dazed (explaining the bruising to the nose, lips and gums) giving him time to pull out the knife, but like I said, that's just my opinion, and your scenario may have happened just the way you explain it, but you still have to some how get the knife into his hands,

d

-

 

[acbytesla]

According to Barbie Nadeau, Perugia has a lot of crime, but few arrests, which fits with what we have observed about Rudy.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9769258&postcount=2685

Some places, especially college towns have a notorious reputation for fudging on their crime rate statistics so as not to frighten off potential students. My point about Seattle and the U-District was to point to Diocletus that Perugia may not be a lot worse than other major college towns.

On think I did notice on a little Google Street view tour of Perugia was the incredible amount of graffiti. Far more than what I see in Seattle. That isn't a good sign. The other thing you notice are all the very narrow streets, alleyways and pedestrian walkways in that ancient walled city. Also, I've seen some of the youtube videos posted by SomeAlibi and Perugia at night is very dark. It would scare me much more than the wide open and mostly well lit streets of Seattle.