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

[Kaosium]

Yep. The CTers are so emotionally invested in this, that they've lost sight of the fact that Amanda and that other dude murdered poor Meredith. You see, many of them have literally spent thousands of hours hunched over their computers, researching where the prosecutor went to grade school, what the judge had for breakfast, and who the court reporter is dating. And for all that "important" work, they want to see a payoff. And if it means a murderer goes free, that's OK.

There's conclusive evidence who murdered Meredith Kercher, Rudy Guede did. The problem is the police had already arrested three people on bogus or mistaken evidence in part due to their aggressive interrogation tactics, bungling and denying Raffaele and Amanda the right to see a lawyer.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the second memoriale is a complete retraction

Yeah, I don't think the case was made to convict Knox or Sollecito... I don't think they are guilty of murder. But the inconsistency of their stories, and Knox's blatant lie about Lumumba leave me with a queasy feeling that something about this is amiss.

Perhaps the biggest error in Abrams' piece was what it did not include, Amanda's withdrawal of her accusation against Lumumba in her second memoriale (my thanks to Katody Matrass for pointing it out by looking over Amanda's testimony). She sounds more clearheaded in it than the first memoriale. Why would a guilty person make a false accusation and then withdraw it. Her two statements sound more like coerced false confessions/accusations to me; for one thing, they don't make much sense. For another, her account of the interrogation is consistent with this hypothesis IMO. Disclaimer: I have no professional expertise in interrogations.

 

[Kaosium]

Yes, and to JFK conspiracy nuts all over the world, the "evidence" shows a shooter on the grassy knoll.

Just sayin'.

Mignini is a JFK conspiracy nut, he says Jack Ruby proves there was a conspiracy.

 

[RoseMontague]

Not being a full-time student of the trial, not having the zealotry to post 30+ posts a day, everyday of the week. For years. I'll wait for the motivations report. Thank you.

(Innocence or guilt is not decided by a clique of 10 or so posters on the internet).

I appreciate you stopping by.

 

[christianahannah]

I tried to keep your post as close to its original form. I know how to format multiple quotes but not quotes within a quote - it disappears.

How about 12 November 2007 then (pmf translation)

"The facts are taking their course and I am slowly realizing that due to the fact that you, father, sent me a goodnight SMS [messaggio] that night and also due to the fact that in the first statement I made I said that Amanda had stayed with me all night long, I must admit [dire] that I said a 90% really stupid thing [grossa cavolata] in my second statement. And that is: 1 that fact that Amanda persuaded me to say something is not true [è una cazzata] and I have said so repeatedly to the judge and to the Squadra Mobile; 2 reconstructing [the events] I realize that it is actually very likely that Amanda was with me all night long, never going out. And I will certainly not be the one to lie in order to help the investigation and get everyone into trouble for no reason [gratuitamente]. Or better still, it would be fabulous for me if Amanda has done nothing, since it is [diventa] impossible that they find any traces on my shoe and on my knife and this story will have a happy ending for me and for you..."


Bolding is mine.

He didn't make himself any clearer earlier (before this passage in his diary) during his validation hearing before Matteini on November 8, 2007:

~snip~

At 18.00 we went out and we went to the [city] center passing by Piazza Grimana, Piazza Morlacchi alla Fontana and Corso Vannucci. We remained in the center until 20.30‐21 and then we went to my house; I do not remember at what time I had dinner, I think I had dinner together with Amanda.

I remember Amanda received a few text messages on her phone and she replied. I do not remember whether the message arrived before or after dinner. Then she told me that the pub was closed, unlike every Tuesday and Thursday and thus she did not have to go to work that day. Iʹm not sure if Amanda went out that night, I do not remember.

~snip~

I previously made a false statement because I was under pressure and I was very agitated, I was shocked and I was afraid. I point out that on 5 November I was very agitated when the agents asked me questions because they put me under pressure. I confirm that on the night of 1 November I spent the night with Amanda. I do not remember if Amanda went out that evening. At 20.30 we were at my house. I got it mixed up.

I remember that Amanda must have come back [home together] with me. I do not remember if she went out. My father calls me every day and I find it strange that he did not call on 1 November. I fail to understand why my prints are there; I [did] not enter that room; I was not wearing those shoes on 1 or 2 November. The one who killed her must have had my same shoes. They are rather common shoes.

~snip~

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Matteini_Hearing_(English)

This hearing was recorded and transcribed but I do not have the official document. I don't know if this wiki has a place for official documents but maybe your wiki does and you can compare.

There is Matteini's order (which I have but not on this computer) which makes reference to prior statements but I can't remember if they are verbatim or generalized.

 

[stilicho]

Yep. The CTers are so emotionally invested in this, that they've lost sight of the fact that Amanda and that other dude murdered poor Meredith. You see, many of them have literally spent thousands of hours hunched over their computers, researching where the prosecutor went to grade school, what the judge had for breakfast, and who the court reporter is dating. And for all that "important" work, they want to see a payoff. And if it means a murderer goes free, that's OK.

Fortunately, Amanda cleared up the whole question of her involvement in Meredith's murder in her GMA interview today. An excerpt:

I just really hope that people look beyond me, in this case, and look, and look to what has happened, really look at the people, really look at the situation, really look at the systems, really look at the aspects of these systems that allow for these things to happen, so that it’s – that it’s comprehensible, and I, I feel like the only way that any of us can get any sort of acknowledgement and understanding and consolation is through understanding. Like I really, I understand that this is really difficult and I can, I can only testify to what happened to me, um, and hope that people believe me, but I think the answers are out there, and I really, really ask that people try to s—try to look for those.

Dean's List at the University of Washington.

 

[RoseMontague]

Fortunately, Amanda cleared up the whole question of her involvement in Meredith's murder in her GMA interview today. An excerpt:


Dean's List at the University of Washington.

She did an amazing job on the interview. Yay, Amanda!! And yes, I believe it was Grinder that posted the link recently verifying she was on the Deans List. Way to go Amanda!

 

[christianahannah]

It has always troubled me that the PGP give such credit to the kids for pulling off the murder without leaving any evidence behind forcing Locard to turn in his grave, yet forget to have a basic story agreed on for their activities that night.

The weak mind of Raf could easily be pushed to a place where he doubted Amanda's innocence and started him wildly coming up with stuff. I don't keep a diary but would think that it was used by him for any and all wild thoughts that shot through his mind. These same people that still don't believe Amanda sold a book deal because they haven't seen an invoice believe that what he said in a diary that wasn't to be public is meaningful.
Maybe Raf gave Amanda a Xanax, went to the cottage to bed Meredith, ran into Rudy, being incensed killed Meredith and left Rudy as the black man found. Explains why their accounts weren't rehearsed.

Sorry to ignore the rest of your post but I only have a comment on this particular part - is it common for defendants in Italy to write diaries concerning their case while in prison? All three did (except for Patrick - at least not that we are aware of) and I wonder were their attorneys aware of this or did the attorneys advise them to do this? I would think they (defendants) would know there would be no right to privacy while in prison and anything they write could be confiscated and perhaps used against them.

 

[RoseMontague]

This hearing was recorded and transcribed but I do not have the official document. I don't know if this wiki has a place for official documents but maybe your wiki does and you can compare.

There is Matteini's order (which I have but not on this computer) which makes reference to prior statements but I can't remember if they are verbatim or generalized.

She quotes a few of Raffaele's statements in the detention order, Raffaele makes a statement in the arrest hearing. Nothing contains his or Amanda's transcripts of their interrogations over four days. What we have is cops stating they said certain things from memory or their notes, which have not been made part of the record either from what I can tell. It would be nice to have them.

 

[Kaosium]

But isn't that based on the argument that she said she was badgered into fingering Lumumba? How do we know that to be true?

Read the statements, why on earth did they arrest anyone based on that drivel if they didn't plan to anyway?

Besides, they admitted to it after the arrests, though they don't want anyone remembering that now. From the November 8th 2007 press conference:

"Initially the American gave a version of events we knew was not correct. She buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them in."

None of those 'facts' were correct and Amanda cast serious doubt on them later the same day after getting some sleep. The next day, November 7th she retracted it completely. However the cops took them into court before Matteini on November 8th along with a 'witness' to Patrick's bar being closed and implying that he had no one to alibi him. Within days more than twenty people would come forward to alibi him and yet it would still take the cops until the 20th to release him.

 

[dudalb]

I have a feeling that US Courts will find a way to deny extradition.
As for the Italian Justice system, it stinks on ice.
The only way they finally got convictions against the Mafia lords in Sicily was to basically set up a special court system outside the normal Italian court system because the regular court system was just too corrupt.

 

[Grinder]

Sorry to ignore the rest of your post but I only have a comment on this particular part - is it common for defendants in Italy to write diaries concerning their case while in prison? All three did (except for Patrick - at least not that we are aware of) and I wonder were their attorneys aware of this or did the attorneys advise them to do this? I would think they (defendants) would know there would be no right to privacy while in prison and anything they write could be confiscated and perhaps used against them.

Is it that obvious that one as a suspect not even charged had lost all rights to any privacy?

I would think that a lawyer would want the client to write down everything that could help his defense. I would even think that an attorney would say not to skip things that seem far fetched. I don't think that things written in a diary should be used against one since they aren't sworn to and are written by someone locked up and in the case of Raf - in solitary.

 

[RoseMontague]

Sorry to ignore the rest of your post but I only have a comment on this particular part - is it common for defendants in Italy to write diaries concerning their case while in prison? All three did (except for Patrick - at least not that we are aware of) and I wonder were their attorneys aware of this or did the attorneys advise them to do this? I would think they (defendants) would know there would be no right to privacy while in prison and anything they write could be confiscated and perhaps used against them.

The only one I really have a clue on is Amanda. She wrote and handed over statements of 6 and 7 November, perhaps she thought what she did not hand over was safe. It is clear that she is constantly writing even before her arrest, during her time in prison and now afterwards with the book and letters/e-mails to the court and the Kercher family. For her at least this is something it seems she is always doing. I believe she is convinced that she can persuade people by her words, I still think she has a hard time understanding how her words are twisted and used against her.

 

[andreajo]

Perhaps the biggest error in Abrams' piece was what it did not include, Amanda's withdrawal of her accusation against Lumumba in her second memoriale (my thanks to Katody Matrass for pointing it out by looking over Amanda's testimony). She sounds more clearheaded in it than the first memoriale. Why would a guilty person make a false accusation and then withdraw it. Her two statements sound more like coerced false confessions/accusations to me; for one thing, they don't make much sense. For another, her account of the interrogation is consistent with this hypothesis IMO. Disclaimer: I have no professional expertise in interrogations.

I wish more people who are weighing in with opinions on this trial had an awareness of their own levels of expertise on various trial-related topics. Thanks!

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the diary was wrongfully confiscated

Is it that obvious that one as a suspect not even charged had lost all rights to any privacy?

I would think that a lawyer would want the client to write down everything that could help his defense. I would even think that an attorney would say not to skip things that seem far fetched. I don't think that things written in a diary should be used against one since they aren't sworn to and are written by someone locked up and in the case of Raf - in solitary.

Grinder,

Raffaele had handed his diary over to his lawyer when one or more guards took it away from his lawyer (sorry I don't have a page number from Honor Bound, but I believe that I have posted it before). His lawyer complained and it was returned, but probably not before being photocopied. I agree 110% with respect to solitary.

 

[AmyStrange]

Raffaele Sollecito: 'I'm fighting injustice'

-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25989014

"Raffaele Sollecito, who along with Amanda Knox, had his conviction for the murder of Meredith Kercher reinstated yesterday, has spoken of his shock at the verdict.

"Earlier, Knox said she would continue her legal fight, and resist attempts to extradite her from America.

"Speaking to NBC news in America, Raffaele Sollecito gave his reaction to what had happened... "

-

 

[anglolawyer]

The only one I really have a clue on is Amanda. She wrote and handed over statements of 6 and 7 November, perhaps she thought what she did not hand over was safe. It is clear that she is constantly writing even before her arrest, during her time in prison and now afterwards with the book and letters/e-mails to the court and the Kercher family. For her at least this is something it seems she is always doing. I believe she is convinced that she can persuade people by her words, I still think she has a hard time understanding how her words are twisted and used against her.

It's like she has not been wised up. After 6 years, 4 of them in jail.

 

[Machiavelli]

Sorry to ignore the rest of your post but I only have a comment on this particular part - is it common for defendants in Italy to write diaries concerning their case while in prison? All three did (except for Patrick - at least not that we are aware of) and I wonder were their attorneys aware of this or did the attorneys advise them to do this? I would think they (defendants) would know there would be no right to privacy while in prison and anything they write could be confiscated and perhaps used against them.

No. It is not that common, this only happened on some cases with extreme media exposure. It's clearly a kind of media effect. When you feel that your words have fallen into the spotlight (as it happened to Knox after her statement against Lumumba) and you know that your words are going to obtain wide resonance among public and be relevant to the case, writing may become an irresistible temptation.

 

[Kaosium]

Sorry to ignore the rest of your post but I only have a comment on this particular part - is it common for defendants in Italy to write diaries concerning their case while in prison? All three did (except for Patrick - at least not that we are aware of) and I wonder were their attorneys aware of this or did the attorneys advise them to do this? I would think they (defendants) would know there would be no right to privacy while in prison and anything they write could be confiscated and perhaps used against them.

That's what Raffaele's attorney told him, so he tried to take the diary from Raffaele. Instead the cops confiscated it and didn't give it back until after they'd photocopied it and soon the diary pages were released to the press.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

FROM: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...h-Kerchers-family-demand-Knox-sent-Italy.html

"Mr Kercher, who was in Florence for the ruling, said: 'Ultimately somebody who is found guilty for murder, whoever they are, should be punished... '"

-----
I wonder if Mr. Kercher knows or even realizes Rudy will be getting out soon. Interesting that he very rarely, if ever, mentions Rudy who has more evidence against him for the murder than the combined evidence they have against all the other people who they arrested for this murder. It makes me wonder what exactly their agenda is.

Also, I could tell the slant on this article by the two creepy looking photos of Amanda, one of Raffaele and Meredith, but none of Rudy who isn't even mentioned until the last sentence. Very odd indeed,

d

-