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

[anglolawyer]

They might have been told simply that it was very important to recover that item, without being told why. That is what I suspect. I think one or two people planted this evidence, and everyone else just went along with a wink and a nudge.

True, but in that case they might have looked for it in a less conspicuously weird manner. I mean, as it was on the floor last time they saw it, how about looking for it on the floor? There is a guy who makes a show of looking in the corner under the window, behind the clothes basket etc but for some reason, lifting the rug is the last thing they do. Like a kid pretending to look for something when he knows where it is all along. Just my impression.

And we know the Perugia cops co-operate in teams of three and up to break the law. Witness the escapades of Napoleone's subordinates. Unlike many, I do not find mass conspiracy at all hard to swallow. There is ample precedent. It may well be SOP for these guys to frame suspects.

 

[RoseMontague]

They might have been told simply that it was very important to recover that item, without being told why. That is what I suspect. I think one or two people planted this evidence, and everyone else just went along with a wink and a nudge.

Since she both collected and tested some of the evidence and her boss ended up being a paid consultant for the prosecution, I think it is pretty obvious that she was biased. The fact that she hid evidence and had a strategy of what to release and when further confirms this. Ignoring the too low reading and cranking up the machine while forgetting a sample was LCN is icing on the cake. And hiding the negative TMB tests on the Luminol prints makes it pretty obvious to any neutral observer. It would not surprise me at all if she went further and planted evidence.

 

[Antony]

.
Yeah, I agree Strozzi. Italians and the world will eventually view this case the way Americans and the world view McCarthyism. This is just one of the reasons why I think Nencini will find them innocent. He is too smart to allow himself to be remembered as the stooge that convicted innocents in a failed attempt to salvage Migi's faux honour.
.

Maybe he will and maybe he won't. It's impossible to make any confident prediction either way. The only thing we can be confident of, is that there are still surprises to come in this whole grim comedy.

In the coming weeks we will look back at his verdict, whatever it is, and some will say "these were the signs", while forgetting the signs that suggested the opposite.

 

[Strozzi]

They might have been told simply that it was very important to recover that item, without being told why. That is what I suspect. I think one or two people planted this evidence, and everyone else just went along with a wink and a nudge.

Some posts above (post 4391) I wrote that many years from now Italian and other researchers will study this case as an example of a corrupt prosecution, falsified forensics, and wrongful conviction. It will be well known and Italians will shake their heads about it and wonder what it was like to live in this era.

Blogs like this will be an important part of the research as scholars look to see contemporaneous comments, questions, and suspicions about the crime and the way it was investigated and prosecuted. The Internet makes this possible for interested strangers like us from different parts of the world to assemble at a handful of blog sites online and exchange comments and challenge and correct each other.

I will pose a challenge to future researchers: heed the very recent comments above about the possible planting of Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp and look to see if it was done by a police official as described in the most recent posts above. Observe the police in the video of Dec 18 2007 as they return to the supposedly-sealed cottage crime scene and make your conclusions whether any of the police, especially the male officer with the flashlight, demonstrate knowledge of where the bra clasp is to be found. Observe the attention they give to it compared to other items. Observe the way it is treated and featured, especially in light of the illusion that at this stage in its collection the police supposedly have no idea if it will contain Raffaele's DNA. You may conclude that the police involved already planted Raffaele's DNA on the clasp before it was "found" under a rug or perhaps you will conclude that that was done in the lab phase by the key forensic scientist Dr. Patricia Stefanoni.

I contend that there is no way that Stefanoni would have returned to Perugia to recover this item, take it back to her lab in Rome, only to discover that it is void of Raffaele's DNA.

 

[Bill Williams]

Ryan Ferguson takes up the case that threatens to return Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox to prison....

http://newday.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/28/wrongly-convicted-ryan-ferguson-takes-up-amanda-knoxs-case/?hpt=hp_abar_newday

 

[Dan O.]

[IMGL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=597&pictureid=8204[/IMGL]

Observe the police in the video of Dec 18 2007 as they return to the supposedly-sealed cottage crime scene and make your conclusions whether any of the police, especially the male officer with the flashlight, demonstrate knowledge of where the bra clasp is to be found.

Look at all that extra tape. I guess somebody wanted to be sure the cottage appeared sealed.


But then there is B.N.'s photo from the middle of November. Where is the tape? Why does the seal appear like it had been pealed off? Why is the front door behind that gate open

 

[Diocletus]

They might have been told simply that it was very important to recover that item, without being told why. That is what I suspect. I think one or two people planted this evidence, and everyone else just went along with a wink and a nudge.

That's what I think.

Another point: They already had the bra with Guede's Y-DNA on it. The clasp wasn't even necessary unless they wanted to find someone else's DNA on it.

The clasp is the only item left in the room that I can think of that would automatically be incriminating* to whoever's DNA was on it, because it was a part of the undergarments and therefore would not be expected to have innocently come into contact with male DNA. If you wanted to plant DNA on an item in order to frame somebody, the clasp would be the best place.

* = Well, unless multiple people's DNA was found on it, in which case it would just be a contaminated piece of junk.

 

[Diocletus]

Observe the police in the video of Dec 18 2007 as they return to the supposedly-sealed cottage crime scene and make your conclusions whether any of the police, especially the male officer with the flashlight, demonstrate knowledge of where the bra clasp is to be found. Observe the attention they give to it compared to other items.

I'd like to see flashlight man's DNA compared to what's on the clasp.

 

[NancyS]

I'm still trying to make the point that you can't tell a person's character by their looks, and certainly not by the photo a news site has chosen to use to sensationally portray the individual. You just victimize him/her when you have dislikes based on a photo of the person.

Exactly - and it is nonsense to judge someone's character from a photo. I definitely have one of these

http://blog.krisatomic.com/?p=1617

 

[Diocletus]

Exactly - and it is nonsense to judge someone's character from a photo. I definitely have one of these

http://blog.krisatomic.com/?p=1617

Hmm. I thought that Gaicomo Silenzi was a dirtbag when I saw his photo. And it turns out that he's a marajuania-cultivating, girlfriend-mistreating jerk.

I can also tell just by looking at her picture that Napoleoni is a thugette.

I guess I must have special powers of perception.

ETA: That being said, I think Mignini looks like a pastry chef.

 

[Grinder]

.
I think there is a very good chance the bra clasp evidence was 'tampered' with. In my opinion the mastermind would be whoever arranged the return trip, and I doubt that was Stefanoni.

The guy with the flashlight may have been in on it. It was him, not Stefanoni that found the clasp. It was also him that spent his time hovering around that area while the others were searching through the stuff on the bed. It was him making a big show of examining it with his flashlight. Maybe some other things too.
.

Though I lean heavily towards incompetence over the choice for evil, the bra clasp is the one piece that looks like someone helped the DNA get there. I've wondered if they did pick it up the first time and then returned it later. It wouldn't have taken a conspiracy to get it done, just one member of the PLE that saw justice was slipping away, knew the shoes weren't looking good and made sure something would be found.

There is no doubt that the PLE knew from the intercepted phone calls that the shoes were not Raf's by the prearranged Dec. 18th visit. It is also clear that the cottage wasn't sealed in any conventional sense and certainly not to the PLE.

In aliud, - Comodi's alleged threat to Mignini is a factoid that has no credible source. IIRC this comes exclusively from Barbie. If there is no proof of her alleged threat then this is the same as the coke dealer's phone number in Amanda's phone, just a talking point. It's just another example of true rant.

 

[anglolawyer]

Though I lean heavily towards incompetence over the choice for evil, the bra clasp is the one piece that looks like someone helped the DNA get there. I've wondered if they did pick it up the first time and then returned it later. It wouldn't have taken a conspiracy to get it done, just one member of the PLE that saw justice was slipping away, knew the shoes weren't looking good and made sure something would be found.

There is no doubt that the PLE knew from the intercepted phone calls that the shoes were not Raf's by the prearranged Dec. 18th visit. It is also clear that the cottage wasn't sealed in any conventional sense and certainly not to the PLE.

In aliud, - Comodi's alleged threat to Mignini is a factoid that has no credible source. IIRC this comes exclusively from Barbie. If there is no proof of her alleged threat then this is the same as the coke dealer's phone number in Amanda's phone, just a talking point. It's just another example of true rant.

What?

 

[Diocletus]

Could he not render a guilty verdict but distance himself from it by saying: 'guilty on the stipulations of the ISC as to which this court expresses no opinion'?

It's gonna be tough.

I think he will go with a pre-10:00 TOD. That means that Nara is toast, which seems to be contrary to what the supreme court clowns thought.

And, I don't think he can really get Sollecito outside of his apartment until 9:30. The window of opportunity--9:30-10:00--is tough to make work without forcing it.

He's up the creek if he wants to come up with a real motive.

The ISC already suggested that the clasp is infirm.

Osmosis (blood tests, reliability of DNA test, wound morphology, imprint, circumstances of the find) tells us that no Kercher DNA got on the knife during the course of the crime.

If he convicts, the opinion is going to be a doozey. That said, I do expect him to convict due to what the clowns said about multiple attackers in Rudy's trial, and because of the calunnia conviction. Cant't wait to read the "logic" behind any such decision.

 

[Grinder]

What?

The oft stated allegation that Comodi told Mignini she would not be involved in the case if he insisted on the satantic rite theory.

And top of the morning (afternoon) to you.

 

[NancyS]

And, I don't think he can really get Sollecito outside of his apartment until 9:30. The window of opportunity--9:30-10:00--is tough to make work without forcing it.

Does anyone know how long it would take to get from Sollecito's house to the cottage? - And also how long if you factor in a stop at the square to be seen by Curatolo as that must leave even less time?

 

[Grinder]

It's gonna be tough.

I think he will go with a pre-10:00 TOD. That means that Nara is toast, which seems to be contrary to what the supreme court clowns thought.

And, I don't think he can really get Sollecito outside of his apartment until 9:30. The window of opportunity--9:30-10:00--is tough to make work without forcing it.

He's up the creek if he wants to come up with a real motive.

The ISC already suggested that the clasp is infirm.

Osmosis (blood tests, reliability of DNA test, wound morphology, imprint, circumstances of the find) tells us that no Kercher DNA got on the knife during the course of the crime.

If he convicts, the opinion is going to be a doozey. That said, I do expect him to convict due to what the clowns said about multiple attackers in Rudy's trial, and because of the calunnia conviction. Cant't wait to read the "logic" behind any such decision.

What will he do with Curatolo? I've always thought the PGP needed to drop him for sure. Nara doesn't really give a time so her testimony is fungible and worthless.

I think that poop motive could be a way saying that motive doesn't really matter. He could be saying that whether it was because Rudy didn't flush or that Meredith didn't want to play in the sex game it doesn't really nake any difference.

Did I miss a translation of the RIS report's salient section regarding the analysis of Steffy's knife work.

Speaking of missing something, did we ever get an explanation of why the chief was so sure Amanda had told them the truth about Patrick?

 

[Grinder]

Does anyone know how long it would take to get from Sollecito's house to the cottage? - And also how long if you factor in a stop at the square to be seen by Curatolo as that must leave even less time?

It has been stated that the trip from Raf's to the cottage is just 5 or 10 minutes. The plaza is right there so it would depend how long they stayed there.

 

[kwill]

There is no doubt that the PLE knew from the intercepted phone calls that the shoes were not Raf's by the prearranged Dec. 18th visit. It is also clear that the cottage wasn't sealed in any conventional sense and certainly not to the PLE.

Do you think they ever believed that Raffaele was present at the murder? Or were they just trying to scare him into saying that Amanda had gone out that night, like they did during the interrogation? Or did they think he knew a little more than he was telling and thought they could corner him and make him give it up?

 

[NancyS]

It has been stated that the trip from Raf's to the cottage is just 5 or 10 minutes. The plaza is right there so it would depend how long they stayed there.

So the very earliest time they could have been back at the cottage is 9:40 and you would also have to factor in the meeting Guede on the way. If you then consider the time it takes Guede to poo and the time it takes for Amanda to get changed out of the clothes she had been wearing earlier that day - there can't even be ten minutes possible time left for the murder

 

[anglolawyer]

The oft stated allegation that Comodi told Mignini she would not be involved in the case if he insisted on the satantic rite theory.

And top of the morning (afternoon) to you.

Oh that. Thanks. And hiya Grinder!