Thursday, January 09, 2014

Appeal Session #8: Sollecito Attorneys Today Try To Show Where Police And Prosecution Went Wrong

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters

[Giulia Bongiorno today; previously she collapsed in court after a guilty verdict in PM Andreotti’s case]

4. Tweets by Main Poster Machiavelli

148. Bongiorno relies on her “personal belief” as last argument. Bye bye!

147. Bongiorno offers the known arguments to maintain an early time of death. But (now) it’s late for me.

146. She had opened her arguments by quoting Sardinian judge and author Salvatore Satta, to me the choice suggest setting a desperate defence

145. Bongiorno built and waded through a complex building of argument employing extreme rhetoric devices, seemed to be in difficulty to me.

144. I had the impression Nencini was skeptical because not interested in the photos and videos, did not look at them attentively.

143. Details the “plausibility” of an intrusion through the window. Glass shards etc. arguments already seen.

142. “Cogne” is a famous Supreme Court ruling saying guilt can be found “by logical exclusion” on sheer “a contrario” arguments.

141. After brandishing two knifes before the court, talking about footprint, makes an emphatic comment “We are not in Cogne”

140. Bongiorno has ended the ninja-knife-rotating phase.

139. Now Bongiorno speaks about the bathmat bloody print. Says Sollecito’s big toes do not balance on the dystal phalanx. (old argument)

138. Bongiorno shows a picture with an envisioned “knife” (pocket knife belonging to Guede?) together with the print on the bed sheet

137. Nobody brings a “small blow with a big knife”.

136. Says: to paint a large wall you need a “great” (big) brush (paraphrase of a pun from old advertisement) but you don’t use half of a big knife

135. Bongiorno handles a big knife!

134. My opinion: just behind the hyoid bone base there is the cervical vertebra, very resistant, it was the vertebra that offered resistence.

133. When there is a will to kill, the blade penetrates entirely.

132. Bongiorno dismisses the possibility that hyoid bone could have somehow stopped the blade, prevent from penetrating, it’s not resistant enough

131. cites the report by Dr. Umani Ronchi, saying the knife is compatible, but the blade was not used entirely.

130. Last point about the knife is the kind of blade: 17 cm long, while the wound is 8 cm deep. It’s too big, not the murder weapon.

129. Says there isn’t a note indicating a quantifying was done.

128. B: alleges “many mysteries” about Stefanoni’s report. Says there is no DNA amount.

127. In Stefanoni’s report it looks like as if for all knife DNA traces RealTime had been used; and it’s not true. SAL say Fluorimeter used

126. Another point: Fluorimeter. Stefanoni said the PCR method would have been better.

125. Question how he could deduce the knife was compatible. Bongiorno’s points seem extremely weak.

124. Bongiorno attacks on Finzi’s word: quotes testimony when says “It’s the first knife I noticed” and “seemed compatible with wounds”.

123. Question is: possible that Sollecito kills and then puts the knife back in the drawer again? and that he uses a knife from his own kitchen?

122. How is it possible to touch the clasp, but not the rest of the bra? Then Bongiorno says, now let’s deal with the knife.

121. B: There are two questions: 1. why no traces of Knox and Sollecito (except the clasp); 2. why Sollecito’s DNA on clasp but not on bra?

120. No trace of Knox, how could they clean only their own traces…. etc

119. Attributes to Guede the “rest of the whole bra” plus the purse and sweater traces.

118. Emphasizes that other objects in the room instead are “stuffed with” traces of Guede

117. Also, there is the Y chromosome sequence but says it is not reliable for the same reasons.

116. Mentions further reasons for criticism: 1 low template DNA 2 no second amplification (maybe confuses with knife) 3 unknown biological origin

115. Talks about the expert claiming the DNA profile could be compatible with herself (actually wrong, the expert was a female had no Y profile)

114. Says they “found Sollecito’s profile among a 4- individuals mixed trace”.

113. Says Stefanoni applied a suspect-cantered interpretation method on a mixed trace with multiple possibilities. Old argument, weak.

112. The profiles mixed in the trace are more than two, thus DNA not usable. This point of arguments perceived as weak in room.

111. Says the bra clasp trace is a mixed trace.

110. Says mixed DNA profiles are like overlapping of spider webs. High probability of mistake which thread belongs to which one

109. Bongiorno bashes “inconsistence” of Stefanoni and maintains she mistook stutters for alleles.

108. Says if we apply Stefanoni’s criteria to her own findings, the clasp X trace is not attributable to Sollecito

107. Points out the C&V report where they object how Stefanoni considered the peaks departing from guidelines. Say C&V analyzed each peak.

106. Asks, rhetorically, about the way how Stefanoni read the DNA profiles.

105. Mentions the presence of other DNA contributors on the bra clasp.

104. The usual magnified photo showing the dirt on police glove.

103. Calls these “touchings within a contaminated environment”.

102. Says clasp fabric was touched 14 times with one glove, then touched by other gloves.

101. Says the clasp was moved, found under the carpet, originally was under the pillow.

100. B. shows pictures about the object moved around in the room, carpet under table, cloths on bed etc.

99. Complains about the searches made by Napoleoni’s team on Nov 6 & 7 and objects Prosecutor Crini is wrong when says there was only one collection.

98. Says the bra clasp has a “materialization” on the night of Nov. 3 but was not collected because they forgot to place a tag letter.

97. Emphasizes that the forgotten bra clasp has become the pivotal piece of evidence against Sollecito.

96. Says about 20 people have manipulated objects on the crime scene.

95. Emphatically lists the names of all officers who entered the house.

94. Calls the DNA collection “mother of all mistakes” in this case.

93. Items should be touched only once. Stefanoni told the police to not move the items.

92. Disposable gloves must be used, new ones for each item. Quotes Intini saying impossible avoid contamination of crime scene.

91. Says the collection of DNA is fundamental. The collection must be early.

90. Says Cassazione didn’t read the C&V report carefully. Says not all DNA is usable. Stutter peaks should not be considered.

89. Now Bongiorno is talking about DNA.

88. Basically Bongiorno defined evidence against Sollecito as only three points: (1) late call to police (2) knife with Meredith DNA (3) shoe/foot print

87. When B was describing Donnino as a psychic there were people laughing in the room. Her arguments became more effective after the first hour

86. Bongiorno’s series of “half pieces of evidence” seemed like empty rhetoric. The use of video seemed somehow better.

85. The late clock theory is to maintain that Sollecito did not call the 112 after police arrival.

84. The defence theory is the clock was slow, not fast.

83. Bongiorno showed video of alleged Police arrival recorded by parking CCTV, explains defence theory.

82. One thing the SC and PG doesn’t know is about what she calls the “real” timing of Sollecito phone call to 112, as “proven” by defence.

81. One mistake at the Guede trial was about the shoe print attribution.

80. Explains that the subsequent trials of Guede got many facts wrong because they ignored subsequent development.

79. Said Cassazione did not assess the DNA judge appointed report and that testimonies and defence reports were missing.

78. Bongiorno explained the “reverse funnel effect” by which superior court is unaware about additional findings.

77. Sollecito - said B.- would not intervene to help a guy he didn’t know, and not even to protect Knox whom he had been knowing 9 days

76. If cleaning issues were a casus belli among the girls, why would Sollecito enter a raw to defend Rudy?

75. But B. objected this is still only half a motive, because Sollecito had nothing to do with it.

74. Apparently B. acknowledged Laura Masotho testified about problems with Knox cleaning habits. PG thinks means problems living together

73. Talked about the “second motive” calling it “improper use of toilet”

72. Said Guede was a drop-out, the opposite pro-black prejudice is also unacceptable.

71. Urged the court to not assume as individual is a weak and discriminated subject just because a black man

70. The sex theme party is “surreal” Bongiorno said.

69. Said Knox-Sollecito was a tender relation, they enjoyed romantic kisses, were not bored 50y old seeking hot emotions

68. The motive (sex) for the “festino” (little party) was smartly dropped by the PG

67. The motive “accepted” (by courts) was a sex party, but the PG does not believe it.

66. Said motive was considered almost as an optional; said prosecutor general changed the motive because had no choice.

65. Said that Kokomani was offered 10k euros for his testimony.

64. Bongiorno criticized media trials and said witnesses must be “virgins”, otherwise the Aladdin lamp taints the trial

63. Said the Aladdin lamp effect is generated by media trial, in which a “monster” is chased by public opinion

62. Bongiorno talked about “Aladdin lamp effect”: detectives wishes which materialize.

61. Said Mr. Kokomani “materialized” when investigators had desperate need to prove Sollecito and Guede knew each other

60. Bongiorno talked at length to substantiate a scenario of Rudy as a burglar who was used to knives.

59. Rudi would physically approach girls and try to kiss them when he was drunk, B. Said

58. Said Guede harassed girls and Sollecito did not know him.

57. Said when the investigators found Rudi, they could not abandon the first suspects, because it’s difficult like leaving your first love mate

56. Said there is no evidence the three people hung out together.

55. Spoke about Guede’s alleged lifestyle.

54. Said that was the nightmare of Perugia, the intruder nightmare.

53. Said the room is flooded with evidence of Guede all over the place.

52. Bongiorno criticized factual points addressed by Cassazione, mentions wrong early experts reports.

51. She described Knox as almost unconscious, buckled because she trusted Sollecito, thinks the police and Raff say so, must be true.

50. When Knox learns about bring accused by Sollecito she had a collapse while the “psychic” was saying “remember!”

49. Amanda, B. says, did not understand why Raffaele accused her.

48. Bongiorno urged judges to get out from codes and get into the hearts of the two young accused.

47. Said if you believe to the Memoriale, where does it mention Raffaele?

46. The recording of Knox’s conversation with her mother “proves she was still in delusional state”

45. Bongiorno said even if you believe her confession, she doesn’t mention Sollecito.

44. Said Amanda was “induced into raving” by “psychic” Donnino.

43. Explained the three types of false confessions.

42. Said Knox did not commit a crime but convinced herself she did. B. mentions the internalized false confession type.

41. Talked about police mistake on the “see you later” message

40. Said trial was determined by the fact Donnino fid not understand English well, thus sidetracked Knox

39. But, said, if we look at Knox, it’s not her sidetracking investigation, but rather investigators sidetracking her.

38. Said the Cassazione suggests Raffaele lied about timings of call to carabinieri, accused him of sidetracking because he lied.

37. One of the elements against Sollecito is the accusation of having sidetracked investigation. Said it was false.

36. Called Donnino a “medium” ( means .“psychic”)

35. Said Donnino acted as mediator not interpreter

34. Said Donnino altered Knox’s statements.

33. Bongiorno criticized interpreter Anna Donnino.

32. Sollecito’s aunts wiretapped as if they were the most dangerous murderers.

31. Talking about insults [to Sollecito’s family members], Bongiorno cries.

30. Says they also insulted Knox

29. Amanda was caught by anxious urge to answer. She became uncomfortable because police asked too much, altering her serenity

28. Bongiorno says if the court doesn’t want to read the whole interrogation (of Dec 17) they should at least read the memoriale

27. Nencini interrupts Bongiorno: how could I read all interrogations entirely, when Supreme Court prevents me from doing so?

26. Calunnia doesn’t mean there is evidence of murder.

25. Only half of the house of murder investigated. An interrogation considered evidence of Knox’s calunnia.

24. Says Raffaele was “halfed”, against him only half pieces of circum evidence: half shoeprint’ knife compatible only if you consider half of blade

23. [My] Impression that Bongiorno’s start of defence speech was rather weak. Too much over the top, reveals weakness.

22. shoeprint attributed in advance because boyfriend of Amanda. Speaks about “admission” by Rinaldi-Boemis

21. She is tired of Raffaele reduced by “half”, a half character seen as a reflection of Amanda

20. Says Knox was the main character, she was so before the trial.

19. Speaks about “creativity” before the trial. Speaks at length about the bloody shoeprint.

18. Bongiorno: Raf thinks he was put in jail because of wrong print. But not true: it’s because he was Amanda’s boyfriend.

17. Shows pictures of Vinci’s analysis of pillowcase prints.

16. Bongiorno also said other reason for suspicion was that Knox had the keys. The motive chosen was “ideal” not real.

15. Most active and free women are seen as more suspicious.

14. Bongiorno: women are suspected because of today women’s empowerment movements.

13. Started from a sex party gone awry theory. They asked themselves: who could take part to such party? A 20y American sexy girl.

12. Investigators followed Lombrosian criteria (inspired by Cesar Lombroso theories)

11. Says: it was Perugia population who chose the less disquieting scenario, and the investigation was based on “less alarming motive” choice

10. Bongiorno: authority had to chose between a “tranquillizing” student motive and a dangerous serial killer “worrying” scenario.

9. Why did they accuse and put them in jail so early? They didn’t even have the knife.

8. Complains Sollecito doesn’t find a job because has a murderer’s face

7. Bongiorno focuses on the “early bias” against accused, since four days after finding of body.

6. Bongiorno speech hinges around the persecution of defendants. Describes her fear, fleeing from Perugia. Says people didn’t know trial papers

5. Bongiorno was shocked by the angry mob before Perugia courtroom [after Hellmann verdict]

4. Bongiorno: a bloodthirsty mob chasing defendants

3. Reads book snippet about French revolution, describe a horde of sanculots and armed citizens

2. Bongiorno quotes Italian author Satta. Talks about “chase” of the two accused

1. Sollecito is in courtroom

3. Tweets By Freelance Andrea Vogt

15. Leaving court, raffaele sollecito and father expressed satisfaction w/closing args. Perugia attorny Maori to close at next hearing, Jan.20.

14. Bongiorno closing finish: Turn amanda off. Acquit them both, but judge Raffaele Sollecito for who he is, not for half-truths against him.

13. A loud emergency evacuation request was just broadcast in Florence court, but the presiding judge says hearing will continue.

12. Once you’ve seen Bongiorno wave two knives in front of an Italian jury, most other court reporting one has done seems rather dull.

11. Bongiorno holds up butcher knife like the one in evidence to jury: “This knife is too big. It is not the murder weapon.”

10.  New amanda knox court schedule: [prosecution] rebuttals Jan 20, with verdict on Jan 30.

9. Florence amanda knox appeal: court breaks until 14:15. Unclear if sollecito defense will finish today or spill over.

8. Bongiorno: Sollecito is not a puppy dog. He may have brushed her hair, cleaned her ears, but he would not kill for love of amanda knox.

7. Bongiorno and judge exchange laughs over “unca nunca” the eskimo kiss. “I’m over 50,” he said “I need an explainer.”

6. Bongiorno on witnesses found by local journos: “This trial had an Aladdin’s Lamp. Every time cops needed a witness, one materialized.”

5. Bongiorno defending Amanda Knox, while at the same time clearly separating Sollecito’s position from that of Knox.

4. Bongiorno reading amanda’s statement: “If you believe this is a confession, where’s Raffaele? He is never, never, never mentioned.”

3. Bongiorno just read wiretapped comms of Perugia cops Napoleoni and Zugarini insulting Sollecito’s family.

2. Bongiorno: “Amanda amanda amanda amanda amanda . . . And raffaele? Basta with sollecito always being considered Knox’s other half.”

1. Bongiorno: Perugia declared “case closed” 4 days after Kercher murder, w/no murder weapon and a motive intended to calm public fear.

2. Tweets by La Nazione Court Reporter

66. Bongiorno: “In conclusion Amanda and Raffaele are innocent “

65. Bongiorno: “I am convinced that the murderess is Rudy who has already been convicted “

64. Bongiorno “The attack on Meredith takes place at 21.10 when Raffaele ‘s at home “

63. Bongiorno: “Guede had already entered into three more apartments in the holiday periods “

62. Warning to evacuate the court. But it is only a test

61. Bongiorno: “Is it possible that the glass has been broken from the outside “

60. Bongiorno: “The absence of traces of mud on the wall is because in those days it was not raining”

59. Bongiorno: “Plausible hypothesis that someone has entered the window “

58. Bongiorno: “You can not get to a liability via just exclusion . We are not in Cogne “

57. Bongiorno: “Against Sollecito, no real clue “

56. Bongiorno: “The footprint on the rug is not Sollecito, his foot does not match “

55. Bongiorno: “The murder weapon is a boxcutter knife with 8 inches “

54. Bongiorno: “The knife found at Sollecito’s house is not the murder weapon “

53. Bongiorno: “Depth wounds on the victim is not compatible with the size knife “

52. Bongiorno addresses the issue of the knife

51. Bongiorno: “Absurd to think that Amanda and Raffaele have deleted only their tracks

50. Bongiorno: “How can you think that there is only a trace of Sollecito on the clasp ? “

49. Bongiorno: “On the scene of the crime no trace of Amanda, but only Rudy Guede “

48. Bongiorno: “On the hook there are traces of four profiles of DNA “

47. Bongiorno: “That hook looks like it was taken from a landfill “

46. Bongiorno: “The hook was crushed during the inspections “

45. Bongiorno: “The bra clasp was moved “

44. Bongiorno: “The hook of the bra is not at the first inspection reperted “

43. Bongiorno: “About 20 people came to the house between the two surveys

42. Bongiorno: “The finding attributed to Sollecito jumps out only in the second survey “

41. Bongiorno: “It is not true that no one came on the scene between the two surveys “

40. Bongiorno addresses the issue of DNA on the bra clasp of the victim

39. After the break the summation of lawyer Giulia Bongiorno starts again.

38. The hearing is adjourned for an hour

37. Bongiorno ( Sollecito defense ) : ” Rudy Guede did not want to respond to our defense [at Hellmann appeal] “

36. Bongiorno ( Sollecito defense ) : “No survey has ever spoken of the presence of more subjects [than one]”

35. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : “It was Raffaele who raised the alarm”

34. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : “And we demonstrated that Sollicito called 112 before the police arrived “33. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” If the motive are disputes on the hygiene of the house, where was Raffaele ? “

32. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” The indictment identifies the changes to driving and excessive use of water”

31. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : “the relationship of Amanda with Raffaele was tender, kissed like Eskimos “

30. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” Guede unwelcome, if there had been a party he would not have asked “

29. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” In this process, the motive is considered an option, but it is not “

28. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” Absurd to think that Sollecito and Guede became known that night “

27. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” The witness who spoke of the friendship between Raffaele and Rudy Guede was denied “

26. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” Amanda Raffaele prosecuted even when they told [the truth?] “

25. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Absurd Amanda putting herself at the scene of the crime”

24. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” Amanda never pulled into the dance Raffaele “

23. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” Amanda wassidetracked , it is she who is derailed “

22. According to the lawyer Bongiorno interpreter on night of interrogation of Amanda did not just translate

21. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” The interpreter admiited to having helped in the court”

20. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” The interpreter confirms that she has done so in trial court as mediums in the interrogation “

19. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Amanda says that the interpreter invited her to remember”

18. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : “There are black pages in this investigation “

17. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” According to the documents offenses of aunts of Sollecito by those who listened to the wiretaps “

16. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Amanda and nighttime interrogations without a lawyer “

15. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” The identikit identfication of the killer as Amanda proceded and generates slander “

14. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : “On the footprints attributed to Sollecito there was a big mistake “

13, Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) shows some slides in the court on the footprints at the crime scene

12. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Raffaele is not the only other half of Amanda . Just a quick passion “

11. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Amanda was the stronger of the pair with Sollecito “

10. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Amanda was leading [the two] before becoming involved in the legal process”

9. Bongiorno : ” Starting from the motive of the game , Amanda seemed like the perfect one guilty “

8. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” They have chosen an ideal motive and then followed the criteria Lombroso “

7. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” A creation was the motive to reduce fear in Perugia , a party gone wrong “

6. Bongiorno ( Sollecito’s defense ) : ” In record time, the case was declared closed almost immediately , after four days ‘

5. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : “Against Amanda and Raffaele horde of red herrings”

4. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : “Sollecito was branded a murderess when there was no evidence “

3. Bongiorno ( Sollecito ) : ” Raffaele and Amanda have become the symbol of depravity ‘

2. Start of the argument of the lawyer Giulia Bongiorno , Sollecito’s defense

1. Start of the hearing. Today it’s up to the lawyers Raffaele Sollecito

1. Overview post Wednesday by Andrea Vogt

Website of Andrea Vogt

Defense lawyers Giulia Bongiorno and Luca Maori will give closing arguments on behalf of Raffaele Sollecito Thursday in Florence, starting at 10 a.m.

While Amanda Knox has been the main focus of attention for most of the U.S. media covering this case, Sollecito has increasingly become the object of gossip in the Italian press, with tabloid magazines like Oggi regularly publishing snaps of him on vacation this winter in Santo Domingo.

More recently several local newspapers in Veneto published speculation about a new woman friend and fellow University of Verona student with whom he had been hanging out with over the holidays in a small town near Treviso.  Amore or amica? He’s not about to tell.

At his last spontaneous declaration before the court Sollecito complained about his lack of privacy and pleaded with the jury to give him his life back. Tomorrow his lawyers will make the case for his innocence formally to the judge and jury. Expect fireworks from Bongiorno, famous for her captivating oratory and no stranger to high-profile cases — having cut her teeth as defense lawyer for former Italian prime minister Giulio Andreotti.

ol




Comments

While Giulia Bongiorno can be flamboyant she is not especially effective at winning cases in court.

She was part of the team that lost at ex-PM Andreotti’s trial (which was in Perugia) and she has never won a case before the Supreme Court.

Here she is bringing in a lot of extraneous matters, for example on the pending calunnia charges against Knox, Sollecito, the Knox-Mellases and the Sollecito family, which Judge Nencini actually protested because the evidence on those is not before this court.

In the Andreotti case Bongiono lost big to then-prosecutor Chiari. He was the excellent appeal judge the defense teams are believed to have engineered to sideline, in favor of Judge Hellmann.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/09/14 at 07:36 AM | #

The report so far suggests that Bongiorno is stating emotional impacts and emotional reactions to aspects, instead of directly addressing hard facts.

And it seems that some of this is ‘all about Amanda’ even when it is supposed to be about Sollecito. She is complaining about him being ‘the other half’ and yet does the same herself.

29-31: surely the police have the right to ask as much as they need to to find the truth? Disturbing someone’s serenity could also be breaking through a smooth pack of lies. They have to find which it is.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/09/14 at 08:00 AM | #

So what’s Bongiorno saying in Simple Speak?

She’s saying that it was all the police’s fault. The police wanted to pacify Perugia that no serial killer was loose.

She’s saying the police rushed to judgment, used an Aladdin’s lamp to get wished for witnesses, that Kokomani was offered 10K euro to testify (who in the world paid him, the police??? that’s crazy).

Worse, she claims that the police interpreter acted as a medium or psychic and it’s all Anna Donnino’s fault that Amanda Knox began raving and having visions of being at the crime scene.

Using a psychic to confuse her and bring up false visions of the dead, Amanda was derailed by the police interrogation into spouting delusions, it was not Amanda who sought to derail the investigation.

Seems Bongiorno has drunk the Amanda Kool-Aid so long that she is thinking backwards just like Amanda. Speaking of Amanda, Bongiorno is darn tired of Amanda being the big fish in this case. She calls for Raffaele to be seen as much more than Amanda’s better half or worse half, or half of the issue.

Raffaele is the main issue, and get this: Raffaele was nowhere mentioned by Amanda as being part of Amanda’s psychic-induced visions or memories of the crime scene.

Amanda never accused Raffaele even if you take her false confession as valid, it included only herself, not Raffaele.

So Bongiorno drives a really big wedge between the two clients while half-way continuing to defend Amanda from guilt. She splits Raffaele’s case away from Amanda and separates him several times from his brief passionate lovebird.

It’s all the police’s fault the lovebird was arrested in four-day haste, and Raffaele was arrested simply because he was Amanda’s boyfriend because the police were simply trying to close the case quickly to calm the residents of Perugia.

Another big point: Raf did not know Guede at all, which is why Raf is less likely to have been involved with Guede who we know did the crime.

Posted by Hopeful on 01/09/14 at 10:20 AM | #

Hi all,

With Bongiorno its the same old rehashed gobbledygook, garbage, nonsense, or whatever you want to call it, she is not a very good lawyer.

The prosecution must be loving this, as she is sinking RS by herself

Posted by forres on 01/09/14 at 10:50 AM | #

Hi, forres, YES, YES, and again YES:

31. Talking about insults, Bongiorno cries.
44. Said Amanda was “induced into raving” by “psychic” Donnino.
54. Said that was the nightmare of Perugia, the intruder nightmare.
62. Bongiorno talked about “Aladdin lamp effect”: detectives wishes that materialize.

Who in the world would want a lawyer like that? I did not expect Sollecito to even be in court, but once there, I expected him to squeal—instead, they’re pumping out the same unreal BS.

What about the knife and Raffaele’s “cooking” with Meredith, Giulia, can you please provide an explanation to that without crying or fainting?

Posted by Bjorn on 01/09/14 at 10:59 AM | #

Unreal. Seems pretty weak to me.  Grasping at straws.

She seems to confirm the evidence brought forth by the prosecution in some ways rather than to say there is ‘no evidence’.  Such as the footprint, the bra clasp.  Come on.  How many times is DNA evidence found months if not years after the crime and used to convict people?  This focus on the delay of 60 days is really silly.

How did his DNA travel to the bra clasp after the crime when it was not found elsewhere in the house and he supposedly never entered Meredith’s room. 

I like the crying - I mean, really?

Induced to raving by a psychic? 

I wish some of the police could testify who were there during the questioning.

I also like how she confirms that the Italian mob was actually against the prior innocent Hellman verdict rather than cheering it on, as was sometimes thrown around in the media.

Yes, sorry he is the other half in the crime story because he was spending 24 hours a day with AK at that time and he was not able to confirm that she was with him all night, and he lied about his computer activities as well.  No need to do that if you are 100% innocent.

This case is indeed strange because I did expect some amazing strong new evidence to appear over these last years but it didn’t.

Posted by believing on 01/09/14 at 11:13 AM | #

I do not know how the police would be able to examine a crime scene without moving a single object around i.e. the carpet, clothes, bed covers.

Posted by believing on 01/09/14 at 11:17 AM | #

Hi Bjorn,

Your points just reinforce her incompetence, if I were Sollecito I would be asking myself why I paid all this money for this claptrap.

In a court of law cases are won with hard cold facts, not emotional posturing

Posted by forres on 01/09/14 at 11:18 AM | #

thank you very much Bongiorno ..  cheers meredith.

Posted by sikandar on 01/09/14 at 11:20 AM | #

just out of curiosity.. why cant all three suspects be cross examined…? .. did they do it earlier ? ...

Also in the case these two lunatics go scott free, would rudy still be silent in jail when these two partner in crime are roaming freely, and he’s the only one to suffer..?

Posted by sikandar on 01/09/14 at 11:24 AM | #

I hate that term sex party.  I find it extremely insulting to the Kercher family.  There was nothing on the scene that suggested a “party atmosphere” or even an erotic encounter. 

It was all about anger which escalated in a group mentality to violence, terror, intimidation, and then fleeing the scene of a crime.  Whoever started throwing around that term should retract it.

If anything, there was some initial drug use and alcohol involved before the violence, but that doesn’t make it a party. 

Maybe there wasn’t even that much drugging involved - because obviously there was some quick thinking a short time afterwards rather than just a passing out.

Posted by believing on 01/09/14 at 11:26 AM | #

As far as the court is concerned multiple attackers is a given, so why is Bongiorno still trying to paint Rudy as the sole culprit?

As Pete (I think) said some time ago, the only possible defence for the pair at this stage is to propose alternative accomplices for Rudy - accomplices who (like AK & RS) don’t have credible alibis.

Presumably the defence lawyers were well aware of all this so the desperate courtroom rants today merely show they have not been able to come up with anyone. In other words they have no case.

Sigh. Enough already

Posted by Odysseus on 01/09/14 at 11:38 AM | #

I’m feeling more confident in their guilt being confirmed every passing day. The defence has nothing, nothing at all to say. 

Knox and sollecito are cooked this time.

I didn’t realise that if interpol issue a warrant that they wont be allowed to work even,

We have all waited sooo long for this moment, i am going to savour it with a bottle of Proseco on Jan 30 grin

Posted by mollythecat on 01/09/14 at 12:08 PM | #

Cassazione expressly said that you can’t just posit that contamination is possible - you must say specifically how that contamination would have been possible and feasible.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/09/14 at 12:34 PM | #

It seems a spurious line of reasoning to say that a ‘will to kill’ would use the entire blade, not ‘just’ 8 cms.

The ‘will to kill’ would carry out whatever was ‘necessary.’ It might be 2 cms.

But anyway, even if one were to accept that there was merely a will to silence / stop the screaming, there is no evasion whatsoever from the fact the an average intelligent adult would and should know a knife wound in this area carried a grave and lethal risk.

Such statements simply don’t hold up.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/09/14 at 12:42 PM | #

Poor, poor Anna Donnino, she seems such a kind and helpful lady. 

How on the earth has she become a dangerous psychic in this absurd comedy, written and staged by Giulia, with his little Raffaele watching her.

Giulia should remember that ‘You are only as good as your last performance!’.

Posted by Babushka on 01/09/14 at 12:45 PM | #

Well, while this was rather disappointing, I think we need to be fair and understand that it must be extremely hard to present a credible defense of Knox and Sollecito at this point, given not only the evidence against them, but also the systematic manner in which they have discredited themselves over the past couple of years.

The books and websites have only served to highlight the degree to which they are willing to lie and slander, along with their enduring inability to present a clear and consistent account of their whereabouts on the night of the murder. 

The demonization of the interpreter probably sounded like a good idea when she was preparing her speech, but it’s such a preposterous concept, that I’m not surprised people were laughing.  I guess Donnino was the last scapegoat they could find, considering that accusing Mignini or the police is unacceptable at this point due to the legal challenges spurred by Sollecito’s book.

It can’t be easy for Ms. Donnino to be dragged into this again and blamed for a psychopath’s decision to accuse an innocent man, but hopefully she knows that this is a desperate attempt to shift responsibility away from Knox (since a guilty Knox implies a guilty Sollecito).

Hopefully, Nencini has enough discernment to sift through the lies and distortions. 

——————————————-

Regarding the news at the top of the page, here is a Guardian article discussing the subject:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/09/amanda-knox-italy-appeal-fugitive-meredith-kercher 

It mentions the double jeopardy nonsense even though it acknowledges that the first appeal was annulled.  It’s not as bad as others I’ve seen, but I do think that the Guardian has had rather poor coverage of this case compared to what I’d expect of them. 

The fact that Knox insists on baiting the Kerchers strikes me as extraordinarily selfish and callous.

Posted by Vivianna on 01/09/14 at 02:16 PM | #

Funny how the focus was on Amanda Knox, and not Bongiorno’s client? Hmm. Maybe RS other lawyer, Luca Maori will come up with something better by January 20, but, I doubt that very much.

Here’s ex-lover fighting to escape prison, and she says she won’t accept the court’s decision? Surrounded by enablers, can’t someone put a sock in her mouth?

Posted by Ergon on 01/09/14 at 02:25 PM | #

Comments this am, most informative. It seems Thirty Balls is having tough time and that is promising on many levels.

I laughed at some comments…was like medicine for a tired spirit.

I hope the Kerchers feel a bit better after this display.

Ergon Why (oh why?) won’t someone put a sock in her mouth? Rhetorical.

Posted by Bettina on 01/09/14 at 02:57 PM | #

As odysseus said, the elephant in the room is that the multiple attackers is an established fact for the court, the fact that she cannot address that negates all her arguments regarding Guede.

I’m a bit disappointed that she didn’t reiterate “the cat could have turned their phones on at 5 a.m” hypothesis (I know those court tweet reports are on the fly and incomplete but I’m sure someone would have mentioned the cat if she had…)

Otherwise she does her job in questioning the knife evidence, and the rest, I hope the rebuttals will mention Sollecito’s “I pricked Meredith with the knife” story, too little has been made of it so far IMO

Posted by Xarta on 01/09/14 at 03:58 PM | #

Apart from Bongiorno’s serial insults to the intelligence of the Florence Appeal Court, she implies, in obfuscation-mode, that the prosecutors had alleged that the depth-of-knife-penetration was limited by the resistance of some anatomical structures, such as bones.

The depth of knife-wound penetration was limited, but not because any structures “stopped” the knives.

The knives stopped penetrating because the attackers stopped thrusting, not because the knives hit a bone.

If any bones had stopped further knife-penetration those bones would have been scratched, at the least, but no such marks were reported on the jaw or on any vertebra.

Bongiorno wisely agreed that the soft hyoid bone, which was affirmatively severed, could not be a cause of stopping the knife blade.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 01/09/14 at 04:35 PM | #

This may be slightly at a tangent to today’s news..  but is very relevant to the case :

There has been (for those in the UK) an informative program on lying and people lying about their crimes, and how the forensic psychologists ‘read’ them.

It is good because of the video / real life examples.  It is called ‘The Lying Game’ on ITV broadcast on 7th January at 9pm and available on ITV player

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/09/14 at 05:08 PM | #

The ITV programme talks about (and illustrates) something called ‘duping delight’...where the ‘successful’ lying person takes pleasure in deceiving people, and in having their lies believed.

They go beyond simple lies, and actively go out of their way to convince others ...to force them almost to believe them. It makes them feel clever apparently, to take people in.

And what is the word AK has been using, above?  She wants to ‘convince’ the long suffering victims of her ‘innocence’.

Interesting, though, one example of this duping delight…  the chap was so pleased with himself for getting way with it (for 18 months), that he had to boast about it, and couldn’t help but let it slip out, to a friend (who immediately told the police).

I think in this case it will come out, eventually.

there’s a lot about micro expression, too, in the programme. Helpful to reading people.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/09/14 at 06:16 PM | #

If I were a member of Ms. Kercher’s family, and could stomach the prospect, I’d agree to meet with Knox on the condition that she consent to the meeting being video-recorded, and that she answer every question I have fully.  A release of the resulting video would destroy the false image Knox’s idolators have created.

Posted by Ceylon on 01/09/14 at 06:27 PM | #

I just posted a couple comments on the wrong thread!  Oops:

——————-

Knox has admitted on her blog to having staged a break-in, burglary, and assault on her housemates prior to leaving for Perugia in 2007.

Posted by Stilicho on 01/09/14 at 07:30 PM | #

@Stilicho

That’s very significant. Any idea why she did?  It might account for how the Perugia break-in was staged so quickly and slickly - she had ‘practiced’.

Perhaps the showing off (see comment above) is commencing?

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/09/14 at 07:44 PM | #

@ceylon…I would meet with knox (if I were family). The big problem with that is, she would use the time to hurt them and play games. There fore I would not advise the Kerchers to do that soon.

Remember, she is tormenting them right now, and has no motivation to honesty.

Posted by Bettina on 01/09/14 at 11:05 PM | #

Hi, Stilicho, I went to her blog, browsed a little, felt sick to the stomach, and left without finding what you’re referring to, if you don’t mind could you post a little more information?

For some strange reason Amanda Knox reminds me of Tonya Harding, she skated so well and was so good and radiant when she became a champion, I remember thinking, nah, she didn’t need to arrange to have Nancy Kerrigan’s legs broken, some other jerk must have done that.

I guess the strangeness I feel comes from the fact that somehow the felonette managed to temporarily escape disgrace and stay out of prison, and with utmost brazenness compete against her victim in the Lillehammer Olympics, literally adding insult to injury. Amanda Knox somehow got that far, too, but it won’t be long now till we see justice done.

Posted by Bjorn on 01/09/14 at 11:18 PM | #

Yes Bongiorno, judge Sollecito for who he is -

An introverted knife fetishist and animal porn fan who is an avid reader of Manga comics packed full of pornographic images depicting the violent rape and the murder and torture of women.

Posted by DF2K on 01/10/14 at 12:22 AM | #

Thanks to Machiavelli for his detailed tweets from today’s session. Gave a very complete sense of what Bongiorno said. Almost feel like I was there! (and could understand Italian LOL).

I don’t get why Bongiorno brought up that Amanda “confessed” after Sollecito took away her alibi. Is she trying to remind the court that Sollecito doesn’t have the same alibi problems as Amanda? In any case, she’s reminding the court that Sollecito has still not legally reinstated his support of Amanda’s alibi.

Posted by Earthling on 01/10/14 at 12:38 AM | #

Bettina, I would also advise them not to meet with her, and when I wrote that, I wasn’t focussing on what it would be like to contemplate facing Knox knowing that she had murdered an immediate member of my family. 

Anyone who has gone through what the Kercher family has gone through, the last thing they should be subjected to is a sociopath’s mindgames.

Knox’s hypocrisy is just galling, to write a memoir titled “Waiting To Be Heard,” and complain Ms. Kercher’s family won’t listen to her when she refuses to answer so many questions…because she can’t answer them without admitting her guilt.

Posted by Ceylon on 01/10/14 at 01:05 AM | #

I am curious about Bongiorno’s analysis. If we have not found RS DNA anywhere else in the house, from where the contamination came?

If I understand correctly, the gloves were dirty. That contamination (dirt) must have contained the DNA of the manga man. So I understand that there was a source of dirt in the room that had a sample of DNA from the knife boy.

I do not understand what she is telling.

Posted by chami on 01/10/14 at 06:51 AM | #

To my knowledge the “contamination” of 17 out of 17 loci of Sollecito’s DNA found itself in abundance on the precise spot where Meredith’s bra clasp had been bent out of shape before the bra was sliced off her with a sharp knife.

It had flown through the air from Sollecito’s saliva sample found on a cigarette butt found in an ashtray in the kitchen.

Posted by DF2K on 01/10/14 at 07:32 AM | #

Vivianna, thank you for your comments and explanation why poor Anna Donnino has become a cast member in Giulia’s play.
 
It was a last desperate and pathetic attempt to find yet another person to blame for AK’s deliberate, cunning, manipulative and callous accusation of Patrick Lumumba.

Whether Anna Donnino understands or not why she has been dragged into this scenario makes little difference. She is probably extremely upset and angry. Who would not be? 

Let’s not forget that Anna was contacted in the middle of the night, and asked to come into the Questura, to provide an interpreter for AK, who was being questioned there, after RS had removed her alibi.

Anna genuinely tried to help AK to remember, but her helpful attitude has been used against her and turned into a malicious accusation. 

Giulia Bongiorno is a famous woman, a well-known lawyer, with important connections, and she is moving in high political circles. Yes, she is a defence lawyer, whose job is to defend, but there are, there must be certain rules and limits.

I wonder how this entire case would affect her fame and reputation.

Posted by Babushka on 01/10/14 at 07:41 AM | #

If by chance the two are acquitted this time, is that the end of the case?

Posted by believing on 01/10/14 at 09:55 AM | #

AKs blog about the prank in Seattle is surely either laying the ground for the full truth about a Perugian “prank-gone-wrong” (and she only has 3 weeks to come out with it) or she is even more disturbed than previously thought.

If, as SeekingUnderstanding suggests, recounting the Seattle escapade is indeed boasting how off your rocker do you have to be not to realise how people will put two and two together? And to do that at this point in your appeal?

Posted by Odysseus on 01/10/14 at 10:06 AM | #

@Odysseus

Quite.

It makes me wonder which AK dreads more…the insecurity, ignominy and stress of living as a fugitive, or the confines of an Italian jail?

Maybe she is unconsciously seeking to be saved from herself, as it were?

Oh dear, how I wish for everyone’s sake - including her own - that she could and would just take an enormous breath and start speaking in simple facts….let all the convolutions of her stories unravel by the wayside.

She appears to me to be desperate to be loved, liked, and approved of.

Well, there are an awful lot of people who would approve of her for having the courage - even this late in the day - to speak out straight, and tell the truth. I would like to explain to her that we don’t need to hear about her feelings and her fears. These are for her to come to terms with, in private.

Mostly, what is needed is a handful of crucial facts.

The adult world operates on an orderly, daily basis because it deals with facts - not fictions, dreams and fantasies.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/10/14 at 11:13 AM | #

@SeekingUnderstanding

“Maybe she is unconsciously seeking to be saved from herself, as it were”.

I think you may have it there.

Posted by Odysseus on 01/10/14 at 11:55 AM | #

Amanda ought to talk to Eric Rudolph at his SuperMax prison where they lock guys away for 23 hours a day in a tiny concrete cell, get black and white tv only, are allowed outside for exercise a mere one hour per day. They are robbed of all human contact. Even family visits are no-contact style. They say after 5 years most guys’ mental faculties begin to go.

The only good defense is the truth.

She should cough up the facts, say she’s sorry, and beg for mercy.

An Italian prison would be a picnic compared to some of the black holes in the USA, even the ones not SuperMax. She’s much more likely to meet with hardened criminals who would jump her in gangs and break her jaw. She could end up on pain meds the rest of her life. She should take her chances in the gentler Italy.

The truth is marching on.

Posted by Hopeful on 01/10/14 at 12:17 PM | #

@SeekingUnderstanding

Is it actually a coded confession? Coded because she’s long had to stick to the script that her family have loyally, if not wisely, given her (and which she consciously accepted, so no excuse for her there).

Is this “the best truth” she can come out with right now given a self-imposed constraint of “being loyal” etc to her family and supporters?

Posted by Odysseus on 01/10/14 at 12:18 PM | #

Didn’t Knox say that “only the guilty run” or some such about Guede?

Seems like what she meant to say is “I would run too, if I was him”.

Posted by bobc on 01/10/14 at 12:39 PM | #

@Odysseus

Perhaps…  It may be that she has the type of personality disorder that is terrified of abandonment - hence the absolute dependency on her family and friends, and weakness, really, in pleasing them.

In ‘The Lying Game’ programme, it was explained how much mental energy it takes to NOT tell the truth. They said that when we are asked questions, the true answer comes up and is present in our brains….and huge mental effort is required to not just blurt out the true answer but think up an alternative.

Also this alternative story has to be consistent with any other stories or lies…and apparently this is why a person lying will be still in body movement - still muscles, and concentrating face - because they are working overtime mentally. This can cause them stress, too.

They said the true answer is there - often in a mental picture, and energy has to be exercised NOT to just share it, which would be the natural way. So the truth could escape when tired etc., and does escape in micro movements, and verbal clues.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/10/14 at 01:54 PM | #

@SeekingUnderstanding

Sounds interesting, thanks. I’ll try to watch it.

Posted by Odysseus on 01/10/14 at 02:06 PM | #

Regarding entry # 130 by Main Poster Machiavelli:  “Last point about the knife is the kind of blade: 17 cm long, while the wound is 8 cm deep. It’s too big, not the murder weapon,” and entry #11 by Andrea Vogt: “Bongiorno holds up butcher knife like the one in evidence to jury: “This knife is too big. It is not the murder weapon,” and all similar “the knife is too big” entries …

Instead of wielding knives in front of the jury, Giulia Bongiorno should have pulled out a tape measure and measured the circumference of her own neck,  divided it by 3.14159, and then shown the jury in diagrammatic form how the depth of 8cm fills her throat and silences her without hitting her vertebrae. 

Here – let’s do it for her … suppose the circumference of her neck is 13 unlucky inches, which would be 33 cm, with a diameter of 10.5 cm (assuming a perfectly circular cross-section).  Therefore 8 cm would adequately silence someone with her neck size, and the full 17 cm would definitely poke out the other side – literal overkill. 

It is probable that Meredith’s neck size was closer to 12” in circumference, and so the 8cm depth would make an even greater impact, and yet not touch vertebrae.  Perhaps Cardiol MD could elaborate.  Also, if anyone has more exact information on the location, direction, and angle of the wound, that would be helpful. 

However, I think the numbers above accurately account for the situation, regardless of the precision. 

Let us also never forget that Meredith was tortured; she was cut many many times prior to the 8 cm thrust.  The size of the knife was an integral part of the torture – it was meant to invoke fear and I’m sure it did.  It is interesting that Vogt reports “12. Once you’ve seen Bongiorno wave two knives in front of an Italian jury, most other court reporting one has done seems rather dull.” 

Note how these knives when wielded before the jury captured Vogt’s attention; then imagine the way these knives would capture one’s attention when wielded in a small room where there was nowhere to run … and when the knives begin making small cuts all over your body … Torture, pure and simple. 

It was said above that AK takes pleasure in deceiving people.  Let us not forget that she also takes pleasure in torturing and killing people.

Posted by Patrizio on 01/10/14 at 02:49 PM | #

Bjorn and Stilicho- I searched for April Fool prank and this is what I found:

http://gator941.hostgator.com/~michael/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=173

Also: AK has no alibi. WE are waiting to HEAR where she was between 9p and 1p b/c RS denies she was with him. She cannot say where she was yet she remembers RS sink trouble and the mop, remembers MK put washing in the machine the last day she saw her, remembers exactly what they said during interview at police, etc… Now I am waiting for her OJ version of “If I Did It”. See you in jail.

Posted by Annie on 01/10/14 at 02:53 PM | #

There’s an excellent article on the TEK Journalism UK website about Amanda Knox admitting that she has staged a burglary:

http://www.tekjournalismuk.com/45/post/2014/01/exclusive-amanda-knox-admits-staging-burgulary.html

Posted by The Machine on 01/10/14 at 03:23 PM | #

I was going to say something last week about Bongiorno’s forthcoming appearance/performance but never ended up making my thoughts heard.

The Diva.

I watched a youtube video today of her in full flight. I cannot read or speak or understand the Italian language but it was enough even for an English speaker like me to see it was all an act.

I suppose she has to be seen to earn the ridiculous amounts of money they pay her.

Filthy lucre.

As an educated woman does she really believe Sollecito is innocent?
I don’t think so..

Her performance on the video seemed histrionic in the extreme, and I really do think it was a (knowingly) last ditch attempt from her.
It was very weak in my opinion.

“judge Raffaele for who he is”

Is that the best she can do?
Look at him for gawd sakes…

Posted by DF2K on 01/10/14 at 03:45 PM | #

Hi DF2K,

Here’s the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW_JkMaz2YI

She seems to be on the brink of a nervous breakdown. She knows Sollecito is going to be found guilty of murder.

Posted by The Machine on 01/10/14 at 04:02 PM | #

Thank you, Annie & The Machine (& Stilicho for the heads-up), I am absolutely speechless. Taken *in conjunction* with all the other evidence, if this is not as close as you can get to a full-blown confession, I don’t know what is. Maybe she’s getting some sort of sick thrill by pushing the envelope like that, taunting imaginary Keystone Cops who are incapable of nabbing her no matter what.

Posted by Bjorn on 01/10/14 at 04:04 PM | #

Here’s the Knox blog comment admitting to have previously staged a burglary to deceive one of her *housemates*:

Rob,

I played part in a April’s Fools prank that involved making a mess – moving and hiding stuff in the house I shared with friends – to make it seem like we had been robbed when we weren’t there. The ruse was immediately revealed after the initial shock. We – all of the mutual friends of my housemates who participated in the prank with me – apologized for the distress caused.

There was no harm to property or persons. Like so many things, this event has been exaggerated for the sake of sensationalism.”

—————————

There is now a commentary on this breaking and self-incriminating story:

http://www.tekjournalismuk.com/45/post/2014/01/exclusive-amanda-knox-admits-staging-burgulary.html

Posted by Stilicho on 01/10/14 at 04:05 PM | #

@Bjorn:  I don’t think it’s a confession but it provides a very compelling motive for the initial confrontation.  As The 411 mentions, Nina Burleigh includes a chain of attention-seeking “pranks” that Knox, as a child, had performed on members of her own family, such as putting salt into the sugar bowl to see Curt’s reaction after drinking salty coffee at breakfast.

Posted by Stilicho on 01/10/14 at 04:18 PM | #

Excellent posts by all and very compelling insights in to the minds of AK and RS, especially Knox. I’m not a betting man but I would be
prepared to wager money that there have been other incidents that have taken place but have not yet been unearthed yet. I’m hoping that somebody else will come forward with more info

Posted by forres on 01/10/14 at 04:51 PM | #

Hi, Stilicho, well, at least she “confessed” she’s staged a burglary before, had this little piece of information been admitted in the trial she would have been fried from the get-go. Actually, it’s not too late now ...

Posted by Bjorn on 01/10/14 at 04:54 PM | #

Do you think it is possible that AK and RS staged the break-in BEFORE Meredith returned home, to scare her?  And then when they came over later and told her that, she exploded and then things escalated?  It’s an interesting thought.  She was gone at her friends for some time, and I believe AK and RS stated at different times that they wandered around the city for some time before going back to his flat.  I’d have to review the time sequence again as there was the visit from RS’s friend but as the villa was only minutes away, seems like a possibility that has never come up before.

Posted by believing on 01/10/14 at 11:09 PM | #

Bongiorno absolutely seems to be acting to me.  What a performance.  Slapping the papers down.  Shouting. Appearing to get choked up.  Well I haven’t watched too many real court cases, especially for murder, so I can’t judge but seems to be overdone, like for TV or something.

Posted by believing on 01/10/14 at 11:11 PM | #

@ Patrizio re Bongiorno’s obfuscation -  “This knife is too big. It is not the murder weapon,”

You have very nicely done what Bongiorno avoided doing - exposing the absurdity of her silly assertion that the 17cm knife-blade was too big to penetrate only 8cm and therefore cannot be the murder weapon.

Re “Perhaps Cardiol MD could elaborate…..”

Yes:

FACT: The 6 ½”, stainless-steel Marietta kitchen-knife, found in Sollecito’s apartment, with Meredith’s DNA on the blade and Knox’s DNA on the handle, is the weapon that killed Meredith.

This fact is so incriminating that the full-force of the Marriott Obfuscation-Campaign was enlisted by the Knoxii, by the FOA, the FORS, their other paid-claque, and even the Hellmann/Zanetti Report [now null-&-void], to drown that fact in a flood of false-reasons-to-doubt.

Here, Bongiorno asserts that Sollecito’s Kitchen-Knife cannot be the murder weapon because that Knife is too big!

Some confusion has arisen, caused by a quotation in Massei Report, where on p371 is written:

”…a single blow was apparently halted by the jawbone…”

The statement that a blow could be “apparently halted” by Meredith’s jawbone is at best a figure of speech, and the quotes of Prof Cingolani on page 152 of the Massei Translation clearly indicate that any cause and effect inference from the phrase “apparently halted by” did not mean it was stopped-by the jawbone:
Prof Cingolani “did not, however, have elements of certainty to establish that the blade which had caused the wound 4 centimetres deep had stopped at the said depth because [it was] stopped by the jawbone.”

Maybe there is a Judicial, translational, or typographical glitch and “by” the jawbone should have been “at” the jawbone.

Anyway, the subject of whether or not the jawbone stopped the knife is an irrelevant distraction; what is relevant is how such a shallow cut could have been lethal.

Meredith Kercher was asphyxiated by the neck-wound which severed both the hyoid bone and the right superior thyroid artery. The severing of the hyoid bone opened Meredith’s airway directly through the skin to the atmosphere, and the severed right superior thyroid artery was the main source of the blood which asphyxiated her when she then inhaled blood directly through her severed airway down into her lungs.

All of these structures were less than 4 centimetres from the skin of Meredith’s throat; that is how it was possible to sever them with Sollecito’s Kitchen-Knife blade, so angled “...that the back of the blade corresponds with a cut that goes backwards, directed from the right towards the left and which stops in correspondence with the angle of the jaw to the right. [Massei English translation, page 141]

20 of Machiavelli’s 140 Notes allude explicitly to The Knife; even the Bra-Clasp gets only 9!

That gives us some measure of the importance Sollecito’s lawyer assigns to discrediting The Knife.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 01/11/14 at 03:35 AM | #

Hi Cardiol MD

Very important explanation. We may hear the same from Dr Crini at prosecutor’s rebuttal time on 20 January. Worth making into a top post.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/11/14 at 08:27 AM | #

A note on the Bongiorno video.

She was part of the team that lost the case against ex PM Andreotti at trial in Perugia. She collapsed in court at the verdict, as she seems close to doing here. Andreotti went to his death without ever clearing his name.

The tough winning prosecutor that her team lost to was the same Chiari (by then a senior appeal judge) that she is believed to have persuaded Chief Appeal Judge De Nunzio to replace in favor of the hapless, ill-qualified Hellmann. (Investigations continue.)

Prison colleagues of Aviello alleged that offers of bribes were made for testimony helpful to RS. She expressed great outrage and promised to sue, but never did. (Investigations and a new trial for Aviello continue.)

As Judge Nencini knows all about this, she seems a very poor choice for final summation. (So does Dalla Vedova for similar reasons as Judge Nencini actually made plain - sharply shutting down his false claim of nefariousness over the Knox HIV incident.)

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/11/14 at 08:28 AM | #

Thank you Cardiol
Very clear and precise explanation.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/11/14 at 09:46 AM | #

@Cardiol MD - Thank you for the clarifications. It seemed the height of absurdity to me that someone - especially a lawyer arguing in a courtroom - would claim that a knife must be used to its full length to be effective. In this context we should also recall the images of the scratches left on the knife after AK tried to scrub it clean. Those scratches clearly indicate the depth to which the knife penetrated, i.e. that part of the knife that at the time it was cleaned must have had dried blood on it. I am very interested in creating a graphic diagram of this if you could help me with the complicated verbal descriptions about directions and angles.

Posted by Patrizio on 01/11/14 at 11:55 AM | #

@believing - you have a brilliant suggestion that immediately begins to tie so many things together - that the break-in was staged before the murder and was therefore the cause of the whole event. One thing that immediately comes to mind: this helps explain the numerous times Curatolo (spelling?) saw RS and AK watching the flat, something which never quite made sense before. What if they staged the break-in and went to observe Meredith coming home to find it ...

Posted by Patrizio on 01/11/14 at 12:01 PM | #

Does anyone have any information about the alleged or planned assault in the first staged ‘break in’ (in USA)?

It might help throw light onto how Meredith’s assault came about in the first place.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/11/14 at 12:20 PM | #

One thing to clarify: while the theft of Meredith’s money might well have taken place before she returned home (RS and AK in the cottage when she left to go see her friends) the ‘staged break in’ as referred to here and in the trial is the window breaking after the murder. Too little time from Jovana Popovic talking to Amanda at RS flat 8:40-45PM to Meredith’s arrival (just after 9:00 PM)for that to happen any other way.

Posted by Ergon on 01/11/14 at 12:25 PM | #

@ Patrizio on 01/11/14 at 11:55 AM:

Could I help you “with the complicated verbal descriptions about directions and angles?” Gladly!

I already have some relevant stuff on the subject of scratches, and to promote consistency suggest we coordinate with Pete.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 01/11/14 at 02:53 PM | #

@SeekingUnderstanding: regarding information on the first staged break-in in Seattle - it seems we could get that information via an FOIA request to the local police department if it had been reported to them. I am very - sadly - surprised that none of the other students involved would have spoken up about such an important event in the context of the subsequent murder. They must all be pure gold: yellow to the core. Andrea Vogt seems to be quite able with the FOIA requests - I wish she would carry this investigation further. 

@Ergon: thank you for considering the possibility that the staged break-in might have occurred before the murder. I understand that you are discounting this possibility, and I don’t mean to be pesky, but couldn’t it have been staged sometime between 18:00 and 20:40?

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/explaining_the_massei_report_the_timeline_for_events_before_during_1/

Around 17:45 Jovana Popovic passes by Raffaele’s house to ask him for a lift to the bus station; Amanda opens the door and Raffaele is there (p52).

Around 18:00 The pizza dinner at Robyn’s place begins (p21).

18:27:15 The film file Amelie.avi begins playing via the VLC application on Raffaele’s MacBookPro laptop (p327).

20:18:12 Amanda, via a cell that does not cover Raffaele’s home, receives an SMS from Patrick Lumumba asking her not to come in to work that evening (p345). Amanda is located inside a phone cell which covers her route to Lumumba’s pub (p345).

20:20 Jovana Popovic’s lecture at the Three Arches ends; her mother had called to say that she was unable to send the suitcases because the driver refused to take them; Jovana starts walking to Raffaele’s to tell him she no longer needs a lift to the station (p53).

20:35:48 Amanda, located in Corso Garibaldi or environs, sends an SMS in response to Patrick’s (p345). No further activity occurs on Amanda’s phone for the rest of the day; Amanda declared during the hearings that she switched her phone off when she got back to Raffaele’s house because she was happy not to go into work and be able to spend the night with her boyfriend (p345).

Around 20:40 Jovana Popovic arrives at Raffaele’s to tell him about the lift; Amanda opens the door and tells her that Raffaele is in the bathroom (p53).

@Cardiol MD: I look forward to working with you on this in coordination with Pete.

Posted by Patrizio on 01/12/14 at 02:25 PM | #

Some of the best journalists who have covered the case are now aware of the wiki website. I’ve had nothing but appreciative comments from them. I know these journalists will read the documents carefully. Consequently, they will have a much better understanding of the evidence. I expect to see much better reporting on both sides of the Atlantic when the case is back in the news. We’ve already seen this happening at The Guardian since Lizzy Davies replaced John Hooper.

There’s an excellent fact sheet about the appeals in Florence on the wiki website:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Nencini_Appeal

I expect two major news organisations in the US to start providing more accurate and objective reports about the case. I’m communicating with old and new contacts in the media. They are listening carefully.

Thanks to all those people who have been tweeting and retweeting. You are making a difference.

My name on Twitter is @harryrag

Posted by The Machine on 01/12/14 at 03:13 PM | #

Hi The Machine

I’m so glad that I finally found Harry Rag since for many years I have read the incoherent responses to Harry upon ground report among others. It really is a very sad commentary that there are people who have no idea at all, and simply refuse to even read anything other than their tiny minds can except. I suspect that these people are simply too lazy and/or too much in denial to disseminate any information other than that which they have latched on to. PT Barnham was right of course. Anyway thank you for everything you have tried to do and written over these many years.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 01/12/14 at 06:55 PM | #

Bonjiorno asks at Line 122:

122. How is it possible (for Sollecito)to touch the clasp, but not the rest of the bra?

Easily answered -

1. Sollecito grabbed the clasp with one hand and cut it off with his knife.

2. Guede, (whom Bonjiorno confirms had his DNA “all over” the rest of the bra), took it off.

QED, Bonjiorno is a terrible defence lawyer in a hopeless cause.

Posted by Mealer on 01/12/14 at 10:12 PM | #

If shes so bad could they be going for a mistrial on the basis of rotten legal advise? Bongiorno is just trying to earn her money then she can wipe her hands off the whole proceeding and continue on to be in government which she wants above all else. I just bet she was never invited to any of Silvio Berlusconi’s ‘bunga bunga’ parties.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 01/12/14 at 10:49 PM | #

@ Grahame Rhodes:

“If shes so bad could they be going for a mistrial on the basis of rotten legal advise? “

Yes GH! As in:

“23. Lawyer Dalla Vedova: “A murder without a motive is fallacious ”

When Dalla Vedova made the above incompetent argument, I did wonder if it was the beginning of a Skakel-type set-up.”

Remember? Skakel has recently so-persuaded an Appellate Judge that he was Incompetently-represented and is already out on bail!

Posted by Cardiol MD on 01/12/14 at 11:56 PM | #

Hopefully, B. Is just feasible ...even if she does use tautological or plain sloppy logic!
And amateur dramatics…

Presumably the Sollecitos have chosen her, and agree with her approach and representation?

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/13/14 at 04:17 AM | #

I intend to send e-mails or tweets to any journalist who has ever covered the case making them aware that the translations of official court documents and court testimony are available at the wiki website. Retweets would be very much appreciated. I don’t want any journalist to have any excuses for getting their facts wrong after the verdicts on 30 January. My name on Twitter is @harryrag

Posted by The Machine on 01/13/14 at 01:48 PM | #

@ Cardiol

You are a physician, and I think if you could follow Bongiorno unfold her argument in Italian, you would have immediately got the pulse of how utter idiotic it was.

The argument was, in fact, entirely hinging aroundf the supposed “lack of intent to kill”, something which you should infer if you assume that the weapon was the 17 cm long knife. Why? Because the wound is only 8 cm deep. This is the argument.

Bongiorno’s long talk about the size of the blade and the depth of the wound carries an implicit message, that is: the topic is the possible lack of a full intent to kill (thus, downgrade to voluntay manslaughter). Bongiorno was holding two knives, waving them aggressively, in a fashion that would physically show how, either the knife was a smaller one, like the one in her right hand (so not Sollecito’s) or - if the court thought they were guilty and the knife was the on with the17cm long blade - there was not a full intent to kill, and moreover Sollecito was not the one holding it (not as much involved as Knox, not “there” in that very moment).

Besides the fact that a “lack of intent” appears as an unrealistic hypotheses to anyone who could see the external wound, the really stunning point, what makes Bongiorno’s argument look like total trash, is human anatomy. You well know that no way a blade can penetrate further than 8 cm in that region unless the murderer has sufficient force to break the main bone structures. The blade severed the hyoid bone and trachea, and this means it reached the vertebra wall, which is maybe 5-7 millimeters below the basis of the hyoid bone and behind the trachea. The blade would be blocked by the spinous process of a vertebra once that depth is reached, maybe would hit somewhere between c-1 and c-3, that is a double bone wall, a resistent structure, or maybe it hit directly by the jaw bone.

In any event there is no possibility to go beyond something like 8 cm with a blad like that, unless the blow force is really big (like beyond a woman’s arm strenght). If the force is insufficient the blade would pitch and swivel around the point, the energy of the blow would thus be delivered in the transversal direction: a long cut produced by the rotation of the blade, as it happened.

Posted by Yummi on 01/13/14 at 02:51 PM | #

Also, and in agreement with Yummi, there was a second knife wound, depth 4cms deep and 1.5 cms wide on the other side which traversed the other wound. Could two assailants, stabbing almost simultaneously cause different type wounds?

I believe the two different types of knives used, caused the dissimilar injuries. Kitchen knives are now used in most knife assaults, and generally cause greater damage to tissue and muscle. As was found in the 8x8 cm wound. And yes, entirely possible that Amanda Knox, encountering muscle resistance as she slashed, twisted the knife in a frenzy.

Posted by Ergon on 01/21/14 at 11:33 AM | #


Make a comment

If you are reading this please log in to post a comment.

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Amanda Knox Confirms She Staged A Break-In in Seattle Long A Sore Point To Previous Victims

Or to previous entry Curious Parallels Between Scott Peterson And Amanda “I Am Not A Psychopath” Knox