Saturday, September 24, 2011

Good Reports By Seattle PI And Daily Beast On Mignini Summarising The Evidence Presented At Trial

Posted by Peter Quennell



[Above: The indomitable victim’s proponent Giuliano Mignini preparing for court today with Giancarlo Costagliola]


Click the image above for Andrea Vogt’s report on Mr Mignini’s afternoon in court. Tough points Mr Mignini made:

“They know the truth because they were at Via della Pergola along with Rudy,” said Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini said emphatically, pointing to Knox and Sollecito in his last remarks to the court. “Not only the young man of color should pay.”...

[Mr Mignini] sometimes seemed to obsess on small and bizarre details, but at other times showed an incredibly effective use of courtroom oratory. Just before showing the jurors gruesome autopsy photos of Kercher’s wounds, for example, he told them softly how he would never forget “the wide open eyes of the victim and the composed, immense pain of her parents.”

He reminded the appeals jurors that it was not a U.S. court, but rather one in the Italian republic and urged them to ignore “improvised detectives who give their superficial opinion from 10,000 kilometers away.”...

[Mr Mignini] went over all the witness testimony, described how a break-in in the apartment Kercher and Knox shared had been staged and frequently cited Knox’s own statements on the stand during her first trial, especially on the topic of a large drop of Knox’s blood on the bathroom faucet and mixed traces of blood and DNA of Kercher and Knox in the bathroom.

Highly worth reading the entire thing. Barbie Nadeau covers the same ground equally well in the Daily Beast and notes that today could be the final scene changer. The embattled Sollecito defense counsel Giulia Bongiorno was reduced to making this preposterous claim:

Sollecito’s attorney Giulia Bongiorno told reporters that Mignini was desperately clinging to old arguments because the independent experts’ report had demolished two key pieces of evidence : a knife and a bra clasp.

Demolished?! The independent experts didn’t retest the DNA material with modern techniques when they could and should have and they even admitted that was Meredith’s DNA profile the scientific police had produced the first time around.

They ended up looking weak and evasive. Hardly the silver bullet Bongiorno wants.

By the way, no sign of Mr Mignini being fazed by the presence (surely unhelpful to Knox and her lawyers) of the muddled “ex FBI agent” Steve Moore whose bizarre and often defamatory takes on the case and Italian justice officials we have again and again shown to be wrong.

Perhaps Mr Mignini should ask Steve Moore to publish his own detailed resume. So far, all requests for it have been stonewalled.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/24/11 at 03:22 AM in The officially involved,  The prosecutors,  Evidence & Witnesses,  DNA and luminol,  Appeals 2009-2015,  Hellmann 2011+,  News media & movies,  Excellent reporting

Comments

Barbie Nadeau, in a fine piece as well, sheds some light on how Steve Moore likely ended up in the courtroom:

“In 32 years in this profession, I have never heard of television networks buying plane tickets for defendants’ supporters in exchange for interviews.”

Posted by brmull on 09/24/11 at 04:11 AM | #

I have a doubt, the nickname Foxy Knoxy, Is she telling the true in this one? That she received it for been talented in sports?

Posted by lulupr on 09/24/11 at 05:34 AM | #

Hi Lulupe

Conjecture and common sense would indictate that while the term ‘Foxy Knoxy’ would be a perhaps name for soccer excelance in a child. The later application and meaning is obviously sexual. ie ‘She’s a real Fox’ etc:
This is a further indication of how Knox saw herself. It would then be a heavy blow to her egoism to find out that Meredith was far more of a ‘Fox’ than she was or could ever hope to aspire to.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/24/11 at 05:58 AM | #

9/24/11
Mignini roars, King of the courtroom! Bravo and well done, Mr. Mignini. Costagliola tells it like it is, and how wonderful to see Attorney General Galati present to support the prosecution.

Maresca’s remarks are laser focused. He reminds the media of the freight train of evidence that never disappeared and is coming right back into the light of day. It briefly disappeared in a dark tunnel, but now it’s back in full view in the brightest of light.

That would be the evidence train. The engine of truth pulls a heavy load.

Posted by Hopeful on 09/24/11 at 09:15 AM | #

Andrea Vogt’s article noted that “Moore arrived in the main square on Friday morning with Chris and Edda Mellas—Knox’s stepfather and mother—and a small group of family and friends. A cameraman with them filmed their arrival.” This implies that the cameraman was part of their entourage.  If true, I find that totally disgusting.  With their daughter’s life in the balance, they choose to continue their roles in the “media circus” prosecutors maligned today in court.  After the hearing, Edda’s only comeback to Mignini’s passionate speech was to call it all lies. Mignini was not telling lies he was describing the evidence.

Posted by Sailor on 09/24/11 at 10:39 AM | #

I had brain spasms reading Nadeau’s article.  Hits a snag?  Appeared to be sailing toward an acquittal?  Is she following the trial or reading blogs run by Knox supporters?

Consider the whole appeal trial.  Other than the independent experts criticizing the DNA findings, what went the defendants’ way?  I can’t think of anything.

And with respect to the DNA findings, is it true, as Nadeau reports, that they were determined to be inadmissible?  When?  By whom?  I am sure that this must come as a surprise to the prosecutors who are arguing that the evidence is valid and convincing.

Help me out here, because I just don’t get it.

Posted by jamesepowell on 09/24/11 at 11:54 AM | #

Barbie Nadeau lately (for me) ping pongs back and forth between describing the evidence and court happenings objectively to spewing ridiculous FOA chants of absurdness (loads of crap).  she has lost quite a bit of the respect I afforded her as one of the few real journalists covering this case.  ive been finding her writings of late highly suspicious and it is disheartening.

Posted by rach on 09/24/11 at 09:03 PM | #

Well Barbie is at the court room, I think she has real fundaments to write and make her mind. I am not there so I cant say if it is a good report of the trial process; and sometimes the same episode is seen different for each person and not neccesary one in correct and the other not. I like that she appoint everything good and bad of the prosecution and the deffense, because if she only highlight things good or in favor to the prosecution and bad things from the defense then she is making the same errors that reporters that are supporters of AK.

Posted by lulupr on 09/24/11 at 09:59 PM | #

I just read the article from Barbie, I do not uderstand how some of you dislike it, I understand AK supporters do so. She started:

“Amanda Knox has appeared to be sailing toward an acquittal—but the prosecution’s powerful closing argument today could alter her fate once again.”

I think it is brilliant! You have to see it in a different way… I will try my best to express how I see it… She is beginning with a statement that is widely expressed from AK supporters and bring it to the reality. So, it’s like take you up to the sky and then let you fall. She is mixing the two point of view, (after all she has to use all involved parties perspectives). But without any doubt she knows that AK is guilty.

And the final sentence: “No matter what happens, her fate will most certainly be much better than Kercher’s.” Wow I don’t see other best way to finalize the article.

Posted by lulupr on 09/24/11 at 10:38 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Fifteenth Appeal Session: Prosecutor Manuela Comodi Starkly Explains All The Forensic Evidence

Or to previous entry Umbria’s Attorney General Giovanni Galati: A Tough New Presence In The Courtroom