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

[anglolawyer]

Quite apart from who says they woke from REM sleep, I assume that Mignini woke from a dream. I agree physiologically this is REM sleep. So mean REM sleep latency in the literature is 90 min with a SD of 30 so all we can say (assuming no sleep disorder or deprivation) is that this was likely to be between 30 min and 150 min of falling asleep. So we cannot safely conclude he was asleep longer than 30 min, but it is unlikely given above caveats that it was less than 30 min.

OK. What was the dream? I want to know the details before I will believe it. Provided it's a credible dream then fine, it should stand as conclusive proof of his story. Put him under the lights and start pulling his toenails out, then his teeth, until he squeals.

 

[MichaelB]

Thank you, I did not have this document.
I'm reading it.
-------------------
Added:

Now I've read the relevant parts.
Not much details in the whole text, but it seems that at 21:26 Naruto crashed after a few moments of viewing.
So at best it may prove the last interaction at 21:26.

Well if Guede is at the cottage by his own admission when Meredith got home around 9pm and there's human interaction on Raffaele's computer at 9.26pm at his place...... don't you think that creates a problem?

What was Guede doing with Meredith between 9pm and 9.30pm which is the earliest he could have arrived under Crini's theory? What happens when Raffaele arrives and meets this complete stranger who's an unwelcome guest in Meredith's home and she was suppose to study before going to bed?

 

[MichaelB]

delete

 

[Desert Fox]

Still reading through the thread but have some comments and concerns

Of note, while I let my license lapse, I was at one time a state qualified private investigator. Doesn't make me a super expert but at least know some of the basics.

First, this case reminds me a lot of the Norfolk Four case. I was in the navy and just can imagine myself having been in that same situation. As such, I can transfer the case through their similarities and think I can get a personal connection

Are there any comparable cases where there was a murder involving multiple assailants where they successfully remove the traces of all but one person? Can it actually be done in a short time frame? Make most sense just to clean it all up.

Second, I can remember a case of fraud on a TV program years ago. A woman worked at a DMV (Department of Motor Vehicle), created ID of various people, and then would pose as them and make huge purchases. In one case, the woman who's identity was stolen went to try to get information and challenge the charges. When the clerk was asked to identify, of course she identified the women who challenged the charges and she ended up going to jail. With how much Knox's pictures have been splashed around, I would trust no person stating they saw them. It is just too easy to manufacture such things in your own mind.

Third, I was reading a website which was one that believed Knox is guilty. It had written something along the lines of "There is substantial literature about false confessions, but it is difficult to find any examples of cases where an innocent person made a false accusation against another innocent party."
Witch trials anybody? Seems like if they make statements like that, their research is pretty shotty.

 

[acbytesla]

Still reading through the thread but have some comments and concerns

Of note, while I let my license lapse, I was at one time a state qualified private investigator. Doesn't make me a super expert but at least know some of the basics.

First, this case reminds me a lot of the Norfolk Four case. I was in the navy and just can imagine myself having been in that same situation. As such, I can transfer the case through their similarities and think I can get a personal connection

Are there any comparable cases where there was a murder involving multiple assailants where they successfully remove the traces of all but one person? Can it actually be done in a short time frame? Make most sense just to clean it all up.

Second, I can remember a case of fraud on a TV program years ago. A woman worked at a DMV (Department of Motor Vehicle), created ID of various people, and then would pose as them and make huge purchases. In one case, the woman who's identity was stolen went to try to get information and challenge the charges. When the clerk was asked to identify, of course she identified the women who challenged the charges and she ended up going to jail. With how much Knox's pictures have been splashed around, I would trust no person stating they saw them. It is just too easy to manufacture such things in your own mind.

Third, I was reading a website which was one that believed Knox is guilty. It had written something along the lines of "There is substantial literature about false confessions, but it is difficult to find any examples of cases where an innocent person made a false accusation against another innocent party."
Witch trials anybody? Seems like if they make statements like that, their research is pretty shotty.

In fact, the renowned defense attorney Dershowitz makes this exact claim. Of course, in fact it's not even close to being true. The recently released Ryan Ferguson was wrongfully convicted after being accused by his friend being coerced in saying that Ferguson killed the victim in that case.

In fact there are hundreds of similar cases. The Central Park 5 and the I believe the Memphis 3 also.

 

[icerat]

Are there any comparable cases where there was a murder involving multiple assailants where they successfully remove the traces of all but one person? Can it actually be done in a short time frame?

It can't be done at all. It's impossible, at least not with anything remotely close to today's technology.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Still reading through the thread but have some comments and concerns

Of note, while I let my license lapse, I was at one time a state qualified private investigator. Doesn't make me a super expert but at least know some of the basics.

First, this case reminds me a lot of the Norfolk Four case. I was in the navy and just can imagine myself having been in that same situation. As such, I can transfer the case through their similarities and think I can get a personal connection

Are there any comparable cases where there was a murder involving multiple assailants where they successfully remove the traces of all but one person? Can it actually be done in a short time frame? Make most sense just to clean it all up.

Second, I can remember a case of fraud on a TV program years ago. A woman worked at a DMV (Department of Motor Vehicle), created ID of various people, and then would pose as them and make huge purchases. In one case, the woman who's identity was stolen went to try to get information and challenge the charges. When the clerk was asked to identify, of course she identified the women who challenged the charges and she ended up going to jail. With how much Knox's pictures have been splashed around, I would trust no person stating they saw them. It is just too easy to manufacture such things in your own mind.

Third, I was reading a website which was one that believed Knox is guilty. It had written something along the lines of "There is substantial literature about false confessions, but it is difficult to find any examples of cases where an innocent person made a false accusation against another innocent party."
Witch trials anybody? Seems like if they make statements like that, their research is pretty shotty.

As far as I can tell, none of these people have the first clue about any aspect of criminal investigations. They can't tell good evidence from bad, and they can't tell good police work from bad, which is why they cling to the belief that there is a case against Amanda and Raffaele.

You mentioned the Norfolk Four, the history of which can be summarized as follows:

Suspect 1 (Danial Williams) confessed, naming no accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Williams.

Suspect 2 (Joseph Dick) confessed, naming Williams as his accomplice. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Dick.

Suspect 3 (Eric Wilson) confessed, naming Williams and Dick as his accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Wilson.

Suspect 4 (Derek Tice) confessed, naming Williams, Dick, and Wilson as his accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Tice.

And then eventually the guy who really did it, whose DNA matched the crime scene DNA, told someone who reported it to the police.

So, people who falsely confess do incriminate others who are likewise innocent, depending entirely on what the police want to hear. Anyone could come up with a long list of cases.

Interestingly, Alan Dershowitz has been spouting this falsehood of late. He has kicked off his shorts and climbed in bed with these people and he is having lots of fun hating on Amanda Knox. He assures the public that she will be extradited to serve her time.

As for the selective clean-up, it would be unprecedented as far as I know, but the point is moot as the crime scene photos show no evidence that any clean-up took place following this messy and disorganized homicide.

 

[Strozzi]

That woman could just as well be Amanda.

Sophie walked together with Meredith toward their respective homes until they split up just a few minutes before Meredith arrived home. Sophie's testimony of that places Meredith on the walk towards her home at the exact time that that female walked through the camera's view. That female is Meredith, unless you believe the earth is flat or that Sophie is part of the cover-up.

 

[Strozzi]

OK. What was the dream? I want to know the details before I will believe it. Provided it's a credible dream then fine, it should stand as conclusive proof of his story. Put him under the lights and start pulling his toenails out, then his teeth, until he squeals.

His dream was like the fortune you find in a fortune cookie. It said "Mignini, you will soon do great things!"

 

[LondonJohn]

Another biased whinge from Vogt:

http://www.theweek.co.uk/europe/amanda-knox/57202/knox-and-sollecito-justice-revisited-prime-time


It must be immensely painful for Vogt to have come to the sad realisation that no major media outlet wants to buy her reports on this case, and that instead she must make do with the crumbs of a moribund under-the-radar publication and her own website. Perhaps if her journalism had balance, integrity and talent, she might be able to make a living from it.

I wonder if she really thinks she's channeling Woodward and Bernstein and is simply the victim of some sort of vast obstructive conspiracy among the mainstream media? Or whether she's at least intelligent enough to realise that she doesn't cut it as an investigative journalist? Either way, don't give up the day job, Andrea.......

 

[Nessie]

As far as I can tell, none of these people have the first clue about any aspect of criminal investigations. They can't tell good evidence from bad, and they can't tell good police work from bad, which is why they cling to the belief that there is a case against Amanda and Raffaele.

You mentioned the Norfolk Four, the history of which can be summarized as follows:

Suspect 1 (Danial Williams) confessed, naming no accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Williams.

Suspect 2 (Joseph Dick) confessed, naming Williams as his accomplice. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Dick.

Suspect 3 (Eric Wilson) confessed, naming Williams and Dick as his accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Wilson.

Suspect 4 (Derek Tice) confessed, naming Williams, Dick, and Wilson as his accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Tice.

And then eventually the guy who really did it, whose DNA matched the crime scene DNA, told someone who reported it to the police.

So, people who falsely confess do incriminate others who are likewise innocent, depending entirely on what the police want to hear. Anyone could come up with a long list of cases.

Interestingly, Alan Dershowitz has been spouting this falsehood of late. He has kicked off his shorts and climbed in bed with these people and he is having lots of fun hating on Amanda Knox. He assures the public that she will be extradited to serve her time.

As for the selective clean-up, it would be unprecedented as far as I know, but the point is moot as the crime scene photos show no evidence that any clean-up took place following this messy and disorganized homicide.

There is an ongoing debate in Scotland about removing the requirement for corroboration, which means the need for two unconnected pieces of evidence before a conviction can happen. That means even if a confession is made, if there is no other evidence to support the confession, no conviction. The debate is whether that is needed any more. Having read this case in more detail, I would say the answer is keep corroboration.

 

[LondonJohn]

OK. What was the dream? I want to know the details before I will believe it. Provided it's a credible dream then fine, it should stand as conclusive proof of his story. Put him under the lights and start pulling his toenails out, then his teeth, until he squeals.

No - what happened was this: Mignini actually didn't sleep for long that night, and was in the police HQ by around midnight. However, when he went over events with the police officers at a later date, they suggested to him that his recollection of events was incorrect, and that he was suffering some sort of traumatic amnesia. They told him to "remember" that in fact he had been in a deep sleep for at least a couple of hours on the night in question, and that he didn't get to the police HQ until at least 2am. Finally, Mignini buckled and gave the police a version of events that they knew to be correct


(Who the hell speaks of their recollection of being in REM sleep anyhow??! I smell a plague-spreading rodent. Oh, and of course it's inconceivable that Mignini - and his "driver" (hehe) - might have anything to gain by lying about when Mignini got to the police HQ that night, is it......? )

 

[Rolfe]

IActually, a better comparator would be the Dreyfus case which divided France for 12 years. This one could outlast that one and have a similar affect.

OK, had to look that up. I certainly see the parallels, but that was resolved a long time ago. As regards current controversial convictions which are the subject of campaigns to get them reversed, we'll see who rusts first, as Douglas Adams said.

Rolfe.

 

[LondonJohn]

Simple question: If you were innocently convicted of murder, would you stress where you were at the moment of the crime, or just vaguely cry "injustice"?

That's the crux. Since the verdict (and well before), Knox and Sollecito have been very reluctant to state where they were in television interviews, and therefore why they are innocent. It's clear they don't want to talk about the facts of the case.

If if it was me, that's the only thing I would would want to talk about, and I would never let an opportunity pass to affirm my alibi. They don't do the most obvious thing, which makes me very suspicious.

Unfortunately, this sort of "argument" only goes to illustrate a lack of comprehension about the burden of proof in a criminal trial.

It is not up to Knox and/or Sollecito to prove - or even demonstrate - their innocence. It is wholly and entirely up to the prosecutors and the courts to prove their guilt. And in this particular case, the additional important factor is that Knox/Sollecito cannot prove their alibi. Nor should they need to.

I will repeat once more an example to illustrate the point. Some months ago now, someone was attacked and killed at around 3am around a mile or so from where I live. On the night in question, I was asleep in bed alone. I have no alibi whatsoever. If, for some reason, I was arrested and charged with the murder, I wouldn't be able to prove my innocence. Nor would it make much difference for me to shout "But I was asleep in bed at the time!". The police and courts would just say: "No you weren't. You're lying."

So the entire thrust of my defence against the murder charge would be that the police/prosecutors have no evidence of my involvement in the murder. That is the important point - not my (correct) claim to have been asleep in bed at the time. And exactly the same applies to Knox and Sollecito. They are exactly correct to be focussing on the fact that there is no credible. reliable evidence of their guilt. Where they claim to have been during the time of the murder is of little importance to their defence, since it is unverifiable* and could be viewed as self-serving.


* Other than the computer interactions that have been discussed already.

 

[andreajo]

As far as I can tell, none of these people have the first clue about any aspect of criminal investigations. They can't tell good evidence from bad, and they can't tell good police work from bad, which is why they cling to the belief that there is a case against Amanda and Raffaele.

You mentioned the Norfolk Four, the history of which can be summarized as follows:

Suspect 1 (Danial Williams) confessed, naming no accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Williams.

Suspect 2 (Joseph Dick) confessed, naming Williams as his accomplice. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Dick.

Suspect 3 (Eric Wilson) confessed, naming Williams and Dick as his accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Wilson.

Suspect 4 (Derek Tice) confessed, naming Williams, Dick, and Wilson as his accomplices. But the crime scene DNA didn't match Tice.

And then eventually the guy who really did it, whose DNA matched the crime scene DNA, told someone who reported it to the police.

So, people who falsely confess do incriminate others who are likewise innocent, depending entirely on what the police want to hear. Anyone could come up with a long list of cases.

Interestingly, Alan Dershowitz has been spouting this falsehood of late. He has kicked off his shorts and climbed in bed with these people and he is having lots of fun hating on Amanda Knox. He assures the public that she will be extradited to serve her time.

As for the selective clean-up, it would be unprecedented as far as I know, but the point is moot as the crime scene photos show no evidence that any clean-up took place following this messy and disorganized homicide.

A coerced statement is more about what the interrogators want you to say than anything else. In this case, the police goal was to implicate Lumumba, so that is what (kind of) happened. If they had wanted her to picture Giacomo in the role of murder, that's how it would have gone.

 

[anglolawyer]

No - what happened was this: Mignini actually didn't sleep for long that night, and was in the police HQ by around midnight. However, when he went over events with the police officers at a later date, they suggested to him that his recollection of events was incorrect, and that he was suffering some sort of traumatic amnesia. They told him to "remember" that in fact he had been in a deep sleep for at least a couple of hours on the night in question, and that he didn't get to the police HQ until at least 2am. Finally, Mignini buckled and gave the police a version of events that they knew to be correct


(Who the hell speaks of their recollection of being in REM sleep anyhow??! I smell a plague-spreading rodent. Oh, and of course it's inconceivable that Mignini - and his "driver" (hehe) - might have anything to gain by lying about when Mignini got to the police HQ that night, is it......? )

Or - he went to sleep but got up two hours later, as usual, without looking at his watch, and then heard a blood-curdling scream that froze his blood. He mentioned it to Mrs Mignini but to no one else. Then the phone rang and then he went to the questura. That's how we can be sure of the time.

And does he really have a driver on 24 hour alert? WTF for? He's only a prosecutor. If they shaved the 24/7 chauffeur service off the budget maybe they could afford a tape recording. I smell bull droppings.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

As fascinating as it is to read about cases in other countries, does anyone have any examples of wrongful convictions within the Italian justice system that are comparable to what many say has happened to Raffaele and Amanda?

 

[anglolawyer]

OK, had to look that up. I certainly see the parallels, but that was resolved a long time ago. As regards current controversial convictions which are the subject of campaigns to get them reversed, we'll see who rusts first, as Douglas Adams said.

Rolfe.

Where are the mods? Rolfe is constantly subverting the thread with veiled references to Lockerbie.

Yes, Dreyfus lay across a fault line between secular/republican and christian/monarchist France and one can see our case eventually having a similar effect across the left-right divide in Italy. We pro-innocence folk thus find ourselves aligned with the right, I think, which may not suit everybody. Still time to bail out and go over to the Dark Side I guess.

 

[LondonJohn]

As fascinating as it is to read about cases in other countries, does anyone have any examples of wrongful convictions within the Italian justice system that are comparable to what many say has happened to Raffaele and Amanda?

There's this great thing - I think it's known as a "search engine", called Google. It's amazing! I typed "miscarriage of justice italy" into the little box on the front page, and something incredible happened:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases#Italy


(That's just for starters, of course.....)

 

[LondonJohn]

Where are the mods? Rolfe is constantly subverting the thread with veiled references to Lockerbie.

Yes, Dreyfus lay across a fault line between secular/republican and christian/monarchist France and one can see our case eventually having a similar effect across the left-right divide in Italy. We pro-innocence folk thus find ourselves aligned with the right, I think, which may not suit everybody. Still time to bail out and go over to the Dark Side I guess.

He was damned good in American Graffiti and Jaws though........