The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 31

[AnimalFriendly]

Er, obviously Knox didn't realise police had Guede's DNA on the police database as an immigrant.

How, not to mention why, on God's green earth would Knox "realise" that police had any particular person's DNA. Guede. Lumumba. Anybody.

 

[LondonJohn]

Of course the further irony here - which one amongst our number clearly cannot see - is that if the Italian criminal justice system truly were so riddled with corruption, mafia string-pulling, graft and bribery - from the very highest court in the land on downwards…. then Italy should rightfully be considered a country in which nobody could get a fair trial.

<fx: the finest analytical mind on this thread struggles to compute>

 

[Vixen]

Just for the record:
Looks like Pete finally caught up
Dr Mignini’s 360-Page Blockbuster Book Due To Be Released in One Month

Excerpts:

"We have not seen it yet"...OK...
"Guede's Book" "hammmered home" something? How?
Dream on Pete, dream on

Just for the record: the "diffamazione trial, in Florence" ended with:"«perché il fatto non sussiste»." and we all know how the second Callunia trial against Knox ended...Isn't it interesting, that there are still people out there thinking that "True Justice for Meredith Kercher" can be achieved by lies about almost everyone involved? ... Just my 0,02 Euro

Also from ANSA Italian Press Agency, also in the news:

Translated from History of Rosa Scognamiglio•November 9

“I met Amanda Knox, but I remain absolutely convinced of what our accusatory system was.” said former magistrate Giuliano Mignini, the prosecutor who investigated the murder of Meredith Kercher (Perugia, 1 November 2007). Last summer, he met Amanda Knox “after she – he recalled during an interview with Ansa – had repeatedly asked to see me. Now that I am retired and I can say that I am only a private citizen, I thought it right to meet a person who had considered herself a victim of prejudice.

<snip>

Mignini said during an intervention on the program “Crimes and Criminology”, the in-depth crime broadcast on the frequencies of Cusano Italia TV. Statements that he also reiterated to the editorial staff of ANSA, specifying that Knox “does not understand what happened from a procedural point of view”. “She did not have the slightest grudge against me, there is no hostility. Perhaps in these years she has also matured”. Mignini reiterated, however, that for his part there was no second thought about the events in Via della Pergola. “In these days – concluded the magistrate – my book on the crime is being printed that I already know will not please the ‘innocent'”.

True Crimes Podcast

Prosecutor Mignini saw the crime scene himself personally. He interviewed Knox in the presence of her lawyers who tried to urge her to shut up. Detectives and seasoned police know when they have got their man. The problem is in building up a case. They can tell by body language - profuse sweating, avoidance behaviour, covering up, lying - that someone is a likely suspect.

Luckily for suspects, bleeding heart jurors are on their side. (cf OJ Simpson.)

 

[LondonJohn]

Er, obviously Knox didn't realise police had Guede's DNA on the police database as an immigrant. She thought she could just point to an outsider - one that did not live at the cottage - as the perpetrator, to detract police from herself.

They didn’t have Guede’s DNA on file related to his immigration. They had his fingerprints and palm prints.

<fx: whistles the “first-class research skills” tune>

 

[Bill Williams]

Sollecito lied to the police three times and not once has he retracted his testimony Knox was out without him until 1:00.

Nor did he take the witness box to defend himself or explain why he told a pack of lies.

An innocent person simply does not behave like that.

Re highlighted part. Compare it with the paragraph immediately before it. Try to spot the way you've contradicted yourself, by insisting (wrongly) that Sollecito never changed his 'testimony'.

We'll wait.

 

[Vixen]

I just read it...."An English edition of the ultra-serious 360-page opus is in the works..."

The ultra-serious opus...bhhahahahah...I wonder if it talks about how Migs & Knox are buds now?. In all seriousness, I'll be surprised if this book is ever translated into English but I have to wonder why not, at least on one level. Migs seems to feel so misunderstood by Americans...you'd think he'd want us to get his side of things. And that goes for Guede too...wonder if his book will be translated into English. Doubt it.

Knox thinks she can work her charm on Mignini and to get him to publicly declare her innocent. So they exchange messages on WhatsApp. After what Sollecito did - encourage a senseless and frenzied attack on a lovely English girl - and then threw Knox under a bus I can only imagine she wants to be friends with him for publicity reasons only. Perhaps she doesn't realise Sollecito was using her to fulfil his amine fantasies to kill a helpless young woman after torturing her with his knives so that he could experience 'extreme sensations'. Ugh. What a creep! It's all a game to him.

 

[LondonJohn]

Also from ANSA Italian Press Agency, also in the news:

True Crimes Podcast

Prosecutor Mignini saw the crime scene himself personally. He interviewed Knox in the presence of her lawyers who tried to urge her to shut up. Detectives and seasoned police know when they have got their man. The problem is in building up a case. They can tell by body language - profuse sweating, avoidance behaviour, covering up, lying - that someone is a likely suspect.

Luckily for suspects, bleeding heart jurors are on their side. (cf OJ Simpson.)

I have to tell you I’m astonished - astonished - that a raging narcissist such as Mignini, despite having had his incompetent, unlawful and disgraceful investigation/prosecution of Knox and Sollecito publicly ripped up and thrown in the bin by the highest court in the country (including numerous direct, detailed and closely-reasoned excoriations of his own role in the fiasco), continues to insist that 1) he was right all along, 2) he never did anything wrong (of course…), and 3) malign nefarious forces were out to get him.

 

[Vixen]

Regarding Mignini's "opus" article:

I noticed the "TJMK Main Posters" are given credit for this flight of fantasy. I don't blame the actual author for not taking credit and hiding behind that cover.

I followed their link "The new evidence is of course the small mountain which the Fifth Chambers chose to ignore" to a 2014 article that stated such jewels as these:

There follows several statements about the footprints including "Five luminol-revealed" ones but no mention of the negative TMB tests. The bathmat footprint is identified as Sollecito's but no mention is made of Dr. Vinci's exclusion of him.
We don't have to wonder why author "Marcello" needs to resort to outright lies and half-truths.

Poor Slick Pete and whatever delusional "Main Posters" he still has left are still trying to be relevant. That bus left the station a long time ago.

Marcello is very well respected.

 

[Vixen]

Methos:

What's an 'ultra-serious' opus? (Someone else asked, but I still want to know.)

'All courts' did not rule that it was a three-person attack. Hellmann ruled in acquitting the pair that it was beyond to competence of his court to express an opinion on any other, potential suspects.

Pete has been promising dire consequences for years, 'Preston, Ciolino, Moore, Fischer, Heavey, Burleigh, Hampikian, and a dozen others might find diffamazione targets.' That's the biggest yawner of his claim. But it is a laugher that Pete still vacillates with the word 'might'. Use of that word means he's right either way!

Sollecito and his shadow writer Gumbel DID NOT LOSE THEIR DIFFAMAZIONE TRIAL! Pete has predicted that S & G would offer an apology within two weeks of the end of that trial! It's been more than two weeks! Thank you Methos for the link to a story about that, from the Italian press.

As usual, you beat me to a lot of this..... you really are the Library of Congress, Wikipedia, and a law library rolled into one.

"Apology" is legal code for = pay a sum in compensation.

There was likely a gagging order - an NDA - prohibiting any further discussion of the case, as part of the settlement.

 

[LondonJohn]

Re highlighted part. Compare it with the paragraph immediately before it. Try to spot the way you've contradicted yourself, by insisting (wrongly) that Sollecito never changed his 'testimony'.

We'll wait.

But I’d have thought that a first-class researcher, who’s been studying a criminal justice case for nigh on a decade, would obviously know what the word “testimony” means (and what it doesn’t mean). I imagine even an average 11-year-old who’s been studying a criminal justice case for that length of time would know that, right?

 

[LondonJohn]

"Apology" is legal code for = pay a sum in compensation.

Where did you manage to pull this latest piece of nonsense from? I imagine you just totally made it up?

 

[Vixen]

Are you truly deaf to the crazy conspiracy theorising you’re apparently reaching for nowadays?

Bongiorno was corrupt Andreotti's counsel. She has a fetish about him. She has his old desk. Bruno was indicted for mafia associations but got off.

Look up the Sollecito family in Canada. Rocco was from Bari and is almost certainly Sollecito's uncle!


Mafia = FAMILY.

 

[Vixen]

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. *You* are asking for a citation!

Sollecito NEVER GAVE TESTIMONY! He was coerced at interrogation - where a mandatory video record WAS NOT DONE. At court he did not testify. He wrote a book about what he believed, and got in trouble with his family for not turning on Knox, in exchange for a plea deal.

If it is testimony you want, there is no testimony of anything he said about the crime.

A signed police witness statement, signed as 'being true to the best of my knowledge' IS A TESTIMONY and can be accepted as such in court.

 

[LondonJohn]

Bongiorno was corrupt Andreotti's counsel. She has a fetish about him. She has his old desk. Bruno was indicted for mafia associations but got off.

Look up the Sollecito family in Canada. Rocco was from Bari and is almost certainly Sollecito's uncle!


Mafia = FAMILY.

So what role, pray, does Marasca (the presiding judge on that SC panel) play in your ridiculous conspiracy? Did Bongiorno, Bruno and the Sollecito crew “make him an offer he couldn’t refuse”?

I suggest you watch rather less of the Godfather movies and The Sopranos, and instead focus on the reliable evidence as it pertains to this case.

 

[LondonJohn]

A signed police witness statement, signed as 'being true to the best of my knowledge' IS A TESTIMONY and can be accepted as such in court.

And you’ll be able to support this claim with (reliable, trusted source) evidence, won’t you?

ETA: I just noticed you introduced the sleight-of-hand word “witness” - you do realise that a witness giving sworn statements is not the same person as the defendant….. don’t you?

So, Vixen: which of Sollecito’s signed police statements was a “witness statement”? And therefore which of Sollecito’s signed police statements constituted court testimony? I’ll wait…..

 

[Bill Williams]

A signed police witness statement, signed as 'being true to the best of my knowledge' IS A TESTIMONY and can be accepted as such in court.

Read Sollecito's book.

 

[LondonJohn]

Read Sollecito's book.

Vixen’s poorly-executed attempt at misdirection (by switching horses to “witness statements”) is all to do with the following sort of scenario: if it’s impractical, difficult or impossible for a witness in a criminal proceeding to appear in the court in person during the trial, it is often possible for the court to enter a sworn statement from that witness as testimony in the trial (albeit testimony that cannot be subjected to direct or cross).

An example might be when a witness is hospitalised during the trial dates.

Obviously this has nothing whatsoever in common with Sollecito’s situation as a defendant.

I’d have thought even a half-arsed researcher would realise that.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

What a load of codswallop.



Sollecito lied to the police three times and not once has he retracted his testimony Knox was out without him until 1:00.



Nor did he take the witness box to defend himself or explain why he told a pack of lies.



An innocent person simply does not behave like that.

So innocent people cannot be coerced into telling the police whichever untrue things they want to hear? That should save a lot of time and money that's currently wasted on recording interviews and paying for lawyers to be present.

 

[Vixen]

This is a good time to repeat:

I'm curious, Vixen: why do you find it necessary to make up/invent/lie about things that never happened? Why do you need to dishonestly twist things using hyperbolically negative language? You present your highly biased opinions and interpretations as if they are facts. Do you get some kind of satisfaction from it? I really do want to know what you think you are accomplishing by this.

Judging others by your own standards I see. Someone who believes hurling abuse, childish name-calling and using lots of emojis is equivalent to reasoned debate.


Goodbye again.

 

[Vixen]

I just read it...."An English edition of the ultra-serious 360-page opus is in the works..."

The ultra-serious opus...bhhahahahah...I wonder if it talks about how Migs & Knox are buds now?. In all seriousness, I'll be surprised if this book is ever translated into English but I have to wonder why not, at least on one level. Migs seems to feel so misunderstood by Americans...you'd think he'd want us to get his side of things. And that goes for Guede too...wonder if his book will be translated into English. Doubt it.

Wow. Here we have a poster how thinks it is like a football match USA vs Italy.

No wonder they know not why they stumble.