awkward questions

awkward questions

Postby welshman » Sun Apr 14, 2013 2:05 pm

I belive that if this case goes to trial again, the gloves should be off and the prosecution should be made to answer difficult questions. If you were defense lawyers for Amanda and Raffaele, what kind of questions would you like to ask the prosecution and what areas would you like to see investigated.
welshman
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:49 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Clive Wismayer » Sun Apr 14, 2013 2:08 pm

Alrighty. Why wasn't Guede arrested for any of his crimes before that of 01 Nov?
Clive Wismayer
 

Re: awkward questions

Postby Clive Wismayer » Sun Apr 14, 2013 2:09 pm

Where are the tapes of the interrogations?
Clive Wismayer
 

Re: awkward questions

Postby Chris_Halkides » Sun Apr 14, 2013 2:12 pm

If getting luminol evidence were so important, why did you wait until 18 December? Why was Meredith's jacket not tested earlier? If Amanda really did cartwheels, and if this is an indicator of guilt, why didn't Giobbi or anyone else mention this? Why was Lumumba's bar kept closed for months? Why didn't the forensic police use substrate controls?
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby schmidt53 » Sun Apr 14, 2013 2:50 pm

Clive Wismayer wrote:Alrighty. Why wasn't Guede arrested for any of his crimes before that of 01 Nov?


Who did the Milan police talk with from Perugia that cause them to release Guede instead of arresting him? What happen to the gold lady watch that found on Guede which might have belong to Guede female neighbour who house burnt down after a break-in? Sorry like Leila said about me I ask absurd question its a addiction. ;-) ;-)
schmidt53
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:10 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby sept79 » Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:03 pm

Why did Stefanoni lie in Micheli's court? Why did Stefanoni continue testing after recording the multiple 'too lows' when she appeared to follow normal protocol on all of her other DNA testing (except for the bra clasp?)? Why did Stefanoni refuse to deliver her testing information/documentation to the defense? Why does Stefanoni still fail to deliver the electronic data files to the defense? Why did Massei refuse to order an independent DNA study after the prosecution's witness (Stefanoni) had been caught lying and defrauding the court? Why did Rinaldi use inaccurate measurements when he presented his bathmat footprint analysis? Why was Lamumba not charged with slander when he proclaimed harsh treatment by the interrogators? Why was misinformation propagated about the 'bloody' bathroom, the Harry Potter book, Amanda's clothing on her bed, the bleach receipts that never made it to trial?
sept79
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 7:16 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Flipp » Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:25 pm

Show us a picture of the pillow case with Guede's palm-print in blood.
Flipp
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby european neighbour » Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:40 pm

Why were twelve cops summoned for an expensive nightshift just to talk with witnesses? Why interviewing them at all around midight?

Why did Giobbi hear Amanda screaming? Where was Giobbi while he noticed those screams?

What's about asking the court for experts from outside Italy, especially from the victim's country, from the UK?

Demanding additional experts about stomach content regarding TOD.
european neighbour
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 9:28 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Mary_H » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:57 pm

Why was Patrick Lumumba not arrested immediately after Amanda signed a witness statement at 1:45 accusing him of murder?

Why was Patrick arrested without questioning or investigation?
Mary_H
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 2:41 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby kindlekitten » Sun Apr 14, 2013 6:19 pm

Why was Meredith's body not processed correctly and why was this not closely scrutinized by the prosecution?
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: awkward questions

Postby erasmus44 » Sun Apr 14, 2013 8:27 pm

Why wasn't the temperature of the body taken until 11 hours after it was discovered?
Why was Lumumba held after Amanda retracted her statement implicating him on November 7?
Exactly how were the computers "fried"?
Why do you resist attempts to retrieve data from them?
Why have you refused to turn over DNA data files and other forensic information to the defense and the court?
What role did the prosecutor's office play in Rudy's sentence reduction?
If Amanda and Raffeale were being wiretapped and followed and if a small army of detectives were down at the station on the night of November 5, isn't it really true that they were suspects rather than witnesses and should have been provided the appropriate safeguards?
Did you check former tenants, the landlord, etc. to determine exactly who had a key to the apartment and who might have borrowed a key and had an opportunity to copy it?
Why weren't surveillance cameras in town checked for evidence?
Did you check to see what Nara could have heard through a closed window?
Why didn't Chiacchiera want to arrest them on November 6?
How much experience did Napoleoni have in leading investigations of this sort?
Why was Lalli taken off the case?
Why did some of the police who originally brought the action against Amanda's parents drop out of the case?
Was Rudy a police informant?
How thoroughly did you investigate the man who was found the morning after the crime in town yelling "I killed her" and wearing a bloody shirt?
Where is Kokomani now? Please provide a complete description of all of his interactions with the police prior to and after the crime?
Please provide a listing of all wiretapped calls in connection with the case and the relevant transcripts; if any transcripts are missing, please provide an explanation of why they are missing?
Please provide a full description of all interactions between Rudy and/or his lawyers and the police and/or the prosecutors before, during and after this case?
Did Mignini or any other prosecutor have any meetings with Massei, other judges or jurors outside the courtroom at any time? Please provide all details?
Why was there a continuing investigation of Lumumba and his business after he was released? Please provide a complete descripition of all interactions between the police and/or the prosecution and Lumumba and/or his lawyers before, during and after the case.
Please provide a complete description of all interactions between the police and/or the prosecutor and the media during the case?
Please provide a complete description of all interactions or communications between the police and/or the prosecutor and the prison officials in the prison where Amanda was held relating at any way to this case or to Amanda?
When does the prosecution contend that the murder occurred?
Has the prosecution investigated any other potential perpetrators other than AK, RS, RG and PL? If so, describe in detail the nature of such investigation and provide all relevant documents.
Describe all efforts the prosecution has made to recover murder weapons in this case and any clothing worn by perpetrators of this crime.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby Clive Wismayer » Mon Apr 15, 2013 12:29 am

Please disclose the briefing notes for the interrogations of 05-06 Nov.
Please disclose any manuscript or other notes of the interrogations.
Clive Wismayer
 

Re: awkward questions

Postby Teddy » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:30 am

Why did the prosecutors not know how to count the number and size of rings on a Nike shoe print?
What happened at the crime scene between the first gathering of forensic data and 46 days later when the bra clasp was collected? Who entered the flat and what did they do? Why were objects moved?
Who sent the forensic police to go back to the crime scene and what was its purpose?
Why did the forensic police make such a scene of the bra clasp?
Why did the forensic police not use tweezers to handle the bra clasp? Why did they hand it between them, place it back on the floor, photograph it, before bagging it?
What tests did the investigators carry out to prove that the broken window was a simulation? Did they carry out real tests to verify access and possible resulting glass pattern? If they didn't carry out tests, why are they claiming it's a simulation?
How can the duodenum of Meredith be empty at 11:30pm proposed time of death if she ate her last meal at 6:30pm?
How can the mobile phones of Meredith be in the flat at 10:13pm if the cell tower they were connected to had never previously been used from the flat?
In an interview with Bob Graham, Giuliano Mignini said that the police officers who interrogated Amanda and Raffaele had a tendency to be a little excitable. What did he mean by that?
Amanda Knox: "According to Mignini, we found Meredith at the villa and said, Hey, that stupid bitch. Let’s show Meredith. Let’s get her to play a sex game. I was horrified. Who thinks like that?".... indeed, who thinks like that?
User avatar
Teddy
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:17 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Clive Wismayer » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:00 am

Teddy wrote:Why did the forensic police make such a scene of the bra clasp?

This is a good one. I have read, I don't know where, that the purpose of the visit on 18 Dec was to locate the bra clasp specifically. Is this true? If so, then it's very funny how they go about it (anyone who has not watched the relevant footage should set aside an hour or two to do so - it's very interesting).

When last seen, the clasp was on the floor. Do they look for it on the floor? No. They start rifling through the incredible mess of stuff they have piled up on the bed. They find and bag absolutely crucial pieces of real evidence in the process including, incredibly, the blood stained clothing the victim was wearing when assaulted. A show is made of looking in the corner by the window but no one thinks of looking under the rug. Then they all troop back into the kitchen and stare at something on a laptop. We cannot see what but it's presumably crime scene pictures. Then they all troop back into Meredith's room and with the camera resolutely focused on the far wall, while out of shot to the right the clasp is 'discovered' under the rug they studiously ignored during the first 'search'. Then, as somebody has already observed, a torch is shone at it, it is is passed around, gets dropped back on the floor (known to be one of the most forensically unclean parts of any crime scene) and photographed. The message is two fold, to show that it was really, really difficult to find the clasp and only Perugia's most intrepid and brilliant minds could have done it and that, being 'protected' by the rug all these weeks, it could not possibly have been contaminated.

The incompetence of these people is staggering and their bare-faced cheek in expecting anyone to buy this BS even more so. If you compare the Jodi Arias crime scene once the cops have finished with it, you will see it is completely empty. i.e. they tagged and bagged everything, just as the Perugia cops should have done had they really been trying to solve the case properly.
Clive Wismayer
 

Re: awkward questions

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:36 am

Did the judges know that Toto was under investigation for drug dealing? What were the circumstances involved in Curatolo's previous prosecution testimonies.? How did the courts in those cases view his credibility and what happened to the people accused of those crimes?

The people who got paid for the animation/crime simulation, who chose them and what experience had they had in this field before. Why were they paid so much?

What happened to the taped conversations that went missing? What happened to the missing CCTV tapes? Did anyone look at these tapes before they disappeared?

Why was the presumed blood substance on the window frame (tested positive for blood with TMB) not tested until 4 months after the crime occurred?
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby MichaelB » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:49 am

What happened downstairs?
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6172
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: awkward questions

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:50 am

Why was the bra clasp stored in a way that it is now useless for retesting?
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby schmidt53 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:19 am

How can you get a proper timeline of the murder without knowing what Meredith was wearing at the time of the murder? Since her jacket, shoes things she would be wearing when arriving home weren't picked up until Dec 18.

We talk about how there is no DNA of Amanda's in Meredith room.

Yet some of her DNA the bathroom yet no where near as much as there should be if the two cleanup in the bathroom after murdering Meredith. After a murder all you really need to do is wash up in the sink?

Raffaele has his "abundant" DNA on the bra clasp his watered bloody footprint on the bathmat yet no DNA in the bathroom while cleaning up after his involvement in the murder.

Then there the staging of the break-in which comes after staging the murder scene more contact with the body when moving the body. Or is the other way round? Which came first the staging of the murder or the staging of the break-in. Either way the only DNA is Filomena room could be contamination from the investigators or by Amanda checking out Filomena room after discovering the break-in on her return to the cottage with Raffaele.
schmidt53
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:10 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Chris_Halkides » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:36 am

Did you swab Meredith's wrists for DNA?
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby schmidt53 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:40 am

Neither Amanda and Raffaele integrations were record because they were only witnesses, budget reason, they were being knocked around by the police, scream at called stupid liars etc. all innocent reasonable excuses.

My question is where are Lumumba integration recording since as he puts it I was a suspect. (A sign of Lumumba going to the dark side hinting that Amanda wasn't a suspect when she was questioned like he know) I guess they got rid of the recording when he was dropped as suspect even though kept his bar closed, checked every part of his life for something to arrest him for.

What about Guede integration is it just buried in his trial file, does it exists or since they already know what Guede involvement thus all they needed to know was Amanda/Raffaele connection with him and the murder.

I sound like a cynical star war fan. At least I didn't say Guede and dark side cause that would be racist. :facepalm:
schmidt53
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:10 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby kindlekitten » Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:34 am

Provide documentation for all training courses for all police employees and contractors for any and all crime scene processing courses and training taken by any and all personnel.
Provide the minimum requirements for said training by similar departments.
Provide all of the above information for the coroners office, employees, contractors and/or consultants and anyone consulted by the prosecution for their professional, technical and/or scientific training, expertise or background.
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: awkward questions

Postby MustBeQuantum » Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:43 am

Awkward questions that IMHO should be asked of ILE, PMs and Civil parties:

How much in "costs" have you attempted to bill the defendants and what is the basis for the "costs"?
MustBeQuantum
 
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:57 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:06 pm

Would you like my answer to any of these questions?
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby erasmus44 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:15 pm

Machiavelli wrote:Would you like my answer to any of these questions?



It depends upon how you define "answer" and "like" but why don't you go ahead and knock yourself out.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby kindlekitten » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:35 pm

Machiavelli wrote:Would you like my answer to any of these questions?


if you can cut to the chase, be honest, use real words without all sorts of cut and pasting
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: awkward questions

Postby MustBeQuantum » Mon Apr 15, 2013 2:18 pm

What is a "notary" in Italy? Mignini said he was hearing confession "as if a notary" in his CNN interview. I would like to know their powers and functions in Italy.

ETA: Answered my own question with a quick scan of the Wiki entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_notary

So was Mignini misrepresenting himself as a "notary" rather than a "magistrate" with the guarantee that he would represent her? For the US, a notary is a nice lady at the bank or your lawyer's office who stamps your signature as authentic after you show IDs. That "as if a notary" might be malfeasance in office as well as all the other junk Mignini has pulled.
MustBeQuantum
 
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:57 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:18 pm

@ MbQ
Obviously Mignini does not claim that he 'represented' himself as a notary, he said his work that night with Knox's declaration was comparable to that of a notary. A notary, in Italy, is a legal officer who formalizes and registers declarations (or other legal events) making them become a legal instrument. A notary does not represent nor guarantee anyone, and does not interfer with the declaration or transaction, but merely guarantees that the declaration or transaction is authentic, properly recorded and legally valid.
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:22 pm

erasmus44 wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:Would you like my answer to any of these questions?



It depends upon how you define "answer" and "like" but why don't you go ahead and knock yourself out.


Which one of these questions?
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Mary_H » Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:42 pm

Machiavelli wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:Would you like my answer to any of these questions?



It depends upon how you define "answer" and "like" but why don't you go ahead and knock yourself out.


Which one of these questions?

Would you like to answer mine?

Why was Patrick Lumumba not arrested immediately after Amanda signed a witness statement at 1:45 accusing him of murder?

Why was Patrick arrested without questioning or investigation?
Mary_H
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 2:41 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby schmidt53 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:05 pm

Machiavelli wrote:@ MbQ
Obviously Mignini does not claim that he 'represented' himself as a notary, he said his work that night with Knox's declaration was comparable to that of a notary. A notary, in Italy, is a legal officer who formalizes and registers declarations (or other legal events) making them become a legal instrument. A notary does not represent nor guarantee anyone, and does not interfer with the declaration or transaction, but merely guarantees that the declaration or transaction is authentic, properly recorded and legally valid.


So during the day Mignini is a prosecutor but at night he's something that's comparable to notary. To bad he didn't protect Amanda rights to a lawyer.
schmidt53
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:10 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Bruce Fischer » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:20 pm

Let's keep conversations with Machiavelli on the main discussion thread. We do not need multiple threads debating Machiavelli. I don't think that was the intention of this thread.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4470
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:21 pm

Should I answer the "awkward questions" or not?
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby B_Real » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:27 pm

Bruce Fischer wrote:Let's keep conversations with Machiavelli on the main discussion thread. We do not need multiple threads debating Machiavelli. I don't think that was the intention of this thread.


Agreed.

Machiavelli is spreading like blue mould in a fine Italian Gorgonzola cheese at the moment.

Just enough mould is perfect. But you don't want the whole cheese to turn blue.
User avatar
B_Real
 
Posts: 3756
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:12 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:53 pm

Mary_H wrote:
Why was Patrick Lumumba not arrested immediately after Amanda signed a witness statement at 1:45 accusing him of murder?


On what grounds you say he was not arrested "immediately"?
As far as I know he was physically arrested by the police a very short time later (maybe one hour and a half later, but I am not sure about the exact time). Although I am almost certain that he gave an account of that time and thatis what I remember.

Knox Lumumba and Sollecito were put under formall custody all of them at the same time, at 8:40 of Nov 6, through just one order; the decree of arrest by the prosecutor implies Lumumba was already under police custody and there was already a police arrest document.

Why was Patrick arrested without questioning or investigation?


Without questioning, because this is the procedure, he was already a formal suspect, and police or investigating magistrates cannot question formal suspects (nor people under arrest). Not before they have been interrogated by a judge and have a lawyer appointed to them.
You need a preliminary investigation judge (GIP) for a first questioning of an arrested or formal suspect.

Without investigation, basically because a witness accused him of a sexual crime.
There was a policy about in the event of a serious piece of circumstantial evidence related to a sexual crime, by which arrest should be ordered immediately before investigation. Then in 2009 they even made a law to make this mechanism compulsory and strip the judges of any residual discretion power; the Constitutional court quashed the 2009 law declaring it excessive (unconstitutional).
Aganist Lumumba there were also other more serious circumstances: besides a sexual crime there was a murder, there was the fact that he was a foreigneer, and the fact that - by Knox's testimony - there was an allegation that he was a dangerous or threatening individual.
Knox's questioning and spontaneous statements were considered credible, at least for some hours; thus, under these circumstances, cautionary custody policy prevails.
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Bruce Fischer » Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:33 pm

Machiavelli wrote:Should I answer the "awkward questions" or not?


They are not posted for you. I would prefer if you stayed on the public discussion forum.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4470
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: awkward questions

Postby schmidt53 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:23 pm

Richard Owen of UK Times report about bleach receipts etc. On Nov 25, 2007 quoting apparently official source saying that entire cottage, except for Meredith room and the bathroom had been thoroughly clean with bleach. Source InjusticePerugia.

Isn't that what the luminal test is for to find unseen on cleaned blood the test that isn't done until Dec 18, 2007.
schmidt53
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:10 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby welshman » Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:43 am

I would be interested to hear Machiavelli's response to the questions raised in this thread as Machiavelli represents the prosecutors in Perugia.
welshman
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:49 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby pmop57 » Wed Apr 17, 2013 9:32 am

Machiavelli will not tell you anything because his friends are the producers of this inexisting case, of this unbelievable mess. He plays the role of their devoted defender. Machiavelli is a troublemaker who exactly knows that there is no case against Amanda nor against Raffaele.

We should never forget that Mignini is the pivot of this case as is his super cop Gutierri who told the world that he solved the case by comportementel observation, that the police does not need other investigations, Case solved, as well as his devoted Perugia followers.

The problem actually remains the same, the case was solved when Rudy was arrested, but they wanted Amanda, they wanted her at all
costs and especially Mignini. Whatever way you analyse their so called evidence, there is no evidence. No serious court would ever condemn somebody basing on that phantasies.

Amanda was their target, nobody else, therefore they ignored Raffaele, therefore they treated Guede with kid gloves, they needed Guede to shoot Amanda and Raffaele, but as said their target was Amanda.
pmop57
 
Posts: 4868
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: awkward questions

Postby TomG » Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:04 pm

If Raffaele and Amanda staged the break-in would their fingerprints not be on the window itself and on the surrounding areas. Is there any evidence of this? Also I’ve sometimes wondered why Amanda would have waited so long to implicate Patrick Lumumba. If she were guilty would it not make more sense to implicate him earlier in the timeline thus blindsiding the cops and allowing Rudy to slink out of the country?
Who punched the downstairs cat in the ear? That I'd like to know!
User avatar
TomG
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:16 pm

pmop57 wrote:We should never forget that Mignini is the pivot of this case as is his super cop Gutierri who told the world that he solved the case by comportementel observation, that the police does not need other investigations, Case solved, as well as his devoted Perugia followers.


This is false.
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby B_Real » Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:19 pm

Machiavelli wrote:
pmop57 wrote:We should never forget that Mignini is the pivot of this case as is his super cop Gutierri who told the world that he solved the case by comportementel observation, that the police does not need other investigations, Case solved, as well as his devoted Perugia followers.


This is false.


Get out, fool.

Watch on youtube.com
User avatar
B_Real
 
Posts: 3756
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:12 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Machiavelli » Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:33 pm

B_Real wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:

This is false.


Get out, fool.



It's still false. Bluster from your testosterone are not going to work.
User avatar
Machiavelli
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:27 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Apr 17, 2013 10:22 pm

Machiavelli wrote:
pmop57 wrote:We should never forget that Mignini is the pivot of this case as is his super cop Gutierri who told the world that he solved the case by comportementel observation, that the police does not need other investigations, Case solved, as well as his devoted Perugia followers.


This is false.



Are you saying that Mignini did not play a major role in this case? If you are right, he sure fooled a lot of people.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby Teddy » Wed Apr 17, 2013 11:34 pm

Machiavelli wrote:
B_Real wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:

This is false.


Get out, fool.



It's still false. Bluster from your testosterone are not going to work.

Yes, it was Giobbi who knew they were guilty based on observation. Maybe he also has theatrical experience?
Amanda Knox: "According to Mignini, we found Meredith at the villa and said, Hey, that stupid bitch. Let’s show Meredith. Let’s get her to play a sex game. I was horrified. Who thinks like that?".... indeed, who thinks like that?
User avatar
Teddy
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:17 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Clive Wismayer » Thu Apr 18, 2013 1:20 am

TomG wrote:If Raffaele and Amanda staged the break-in would their fingerprints not be on the window itself and on the surrounding areas. Is there any evidence of this? Also I’ve sometimes wondered why Amanda would have waited so long to implicate Patrick Lumumba. If she were guilty would it not make more sense to implicate him earlier in the timeline thus blindsiding the cops and allowing Rudy to slink out of the country?

Speaking of slinking out of the country, um, why didn't Amanda? Oh yeah, I forgot, she devilishly stayed behind to direct the enquiry in a manner that suited her. Or something.

:batshit crazy::
Clive Wismayer
 

Re: awkward questions

Postby TomG » Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:12 pm

Teddy wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:
B_Real wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:

This is false.


Get out, fool.



It's still false. Bluster from your testosterone are not going to work.

Yes, it was Giobbi who knew they were guilty based on observation. Maybe he also has theatrical experience?

I think this is the source that is being referred to. This is Edgardo Giobbi telling the world that they could ascertain guilt by observing Amanda and Raffaele’s behaviour during the interrogations. Was there anyone present during the interrogations that had qualifications in criminal psychology to be able to make such a profound observation?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWkZPWRS3N0

OK. so it’s not Gutierri it’s Giobbi but the comments he makes are breathtaking nonetheless! He says “We were able to establish guilt by carefully observing the suspects psychological and behavioural reactions during the interrogations” I can understand the observations being only a part of the evidence but to close a case on these observations alone is a massive self indictment rather than a stroke of genius. Who are the “we” he refers to what were their credentials to come to such a decision couched in an illegal interrogation?
Who punched the downstairs cat in the ear? That I'd like to know!
User avatar
TomG
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: awkward questions

Postby erasmus44 » Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:22 pm

TomG wrote:
Teddy wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:
B_Real wrote:
Machiavelli wrote:

This is false.


Get out, fool.



It's still false. Bluster from your testosterone are not going to work.

Yes, it was Giobbi who knew they were guilty based on observation. Maybe he also has theatrical experience?

I think this is the source that is being referred to. This is Edgardo Giobbi telling the world that they could ascertain guilt by observing Amanda and Raffaele’s behaviour during the interrogations. Was there anyone present during the interrogations that had qualifications in criminal psychology to be able to make such a profound observation?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWkZPWRS3N0

OK. so it’s not Gutierri it’s Giobbi but the comments he makes are breathtaking nonetheless! He says “We were able to establish guilt by carefully observing the suspects psychological and behavioural reactions during the interrogations” I can understand the observations being only a part of the evidence but to close a case on these observations alone is a massive self indictment rather than a stroke of genius. Who are the “we” he refers to what were their credentials to come to such a decision couched in an illegal interrogation?




Mignini said something similar in one of his interviews - although I think it was based on observations of Amanda during an extended period (one or two weeks including the interrogations).
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby pmop57 » Thu Apr 18, 2013 1:35 pm

And Mignini was the pivot of this case. He was the leading head of the investigation so he is the first responsable of the case.
And if he had no control over his subordonnees he still is the first responsable which does not mean that others cannot be held responsable.
pmop57
 
Posts: 4868
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: awkward questions

Postby erasmus44 » Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:11 pm

pmop57 wrote:And Mignini was the pivot of this case. He was the leading head of the investigation so he is the first responsable of the case.
And if he had no control over his subordonnees he still is the first responsable which does not mean that others cannot be held responsable.



Mignini's statement in the CNN interview - "after the first few weeks, we were convinced because of the behavior of the two people and especially Amanda that they were both involved...." A bit ambiguous but it appears to be "post crime' behavior he is talking about.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby pmop57 » Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:22 pm

Why was the corroner not allowed to take the body temperature of the dead ?
A:-) was it incompetence ?
B:-) was it intention from on the beginning to have later a larger time pannel?
C:-) did you already have other information to avoid the body temperature to be taken?
pmop57
 
Posts: 4868
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: awkward questions

Postby pmop57 » Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:32 pm

How do you justify that a police officer was the translator for Amanda Knox? How can such a translator be neutral?
How can a police officer be a mediator between a suspect and other police officers? What do you think was the object of that so called mediation?
Who gave the order not to tape the interrogation?
Why did you refuse the suspect a lawyer?
pmop57
 
Posts: 4868
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: awkward questions

Postby Grayhawker » Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:31 pm

Is Mach one of the 8 police officers with a financial interest in the law suit against Amanda Knox?

Is his motivation to protect his (false) honor and for 30 pieces of silver to continually lie and slander Amanda Knox despite knowing that she and Raffaele are innocent?
Paolo Micheli stated with regard to Amanda and Raffaele: "We do not need evidence, common sense and logic tell us that they dated each other to commit this crime."
User avatar
Grayhawker
 
Posts: 2387
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 4:13 pm
Location: Kansas City

Re: awkward questions

Postby kindlekitten » Thu Apr 18, 2013 4:59 pm

Grayhawker wrote:Is Mach one of the 8 police officers with a financial interest in the law suit against Amanda Knox?

Is his motivation to protect his (false) honor and for 30 pieces of silver to continually lie and slander Amanda Knox despite knowing that she and Raffaele are innocent?


!!!!ohhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! indeed more :batshit crazy:: than ever before!

(and completely off topic, I just realized that everything that was on the left side of the screen is now on the right... been a long couple of days!)
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: awkward questions

Postby welshman » Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:34 pm

Questions I would like to ask the police :-

Amanda only spoke basic Italian at the time of her arrest. During the interrogation how many police officers could speak English?
As Amanda only spoke basic Italian, why was an intepreter not called at the start of the interrogation?
At what point after the discovery of the body did you decide Amanda and Raffaele were guilty?
If you decided that Amanda and Raffaele were guilty shortly after the discovery of the body, how could you tell they were guilty after such a short period of time?
You claimed the interview could not be taped because of budgetary reasons. How much does it cost to tape an interrogation? Why was it you had enough money for the crime scene recreation video but not to tape an interrogation?
Why has Rudy's role in the murder of Meredith been minimised? Mignini called Rudy a poor black boy.
welshman
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:49 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Chris_Halkides » Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:43 am

Dr. Novelli, when a student comes to you with anomalous results from an experiment using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique, will you tell him, "Unless it is proved, contamination doesn't exist?" Or will you tell him to throw out bad reagents and to be more careful next time.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby Alex_K » Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:58 am

Dr. Novelli, would you agree that you have not, in the course of your research, dealt with the issue of DNA contamination in forensic testing, and none of your publications explores this issue in any serious detail?
Alex_K
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:16 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby welshman » Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:43 pm

I know this is an old thread I started but further questions have come to mind recently :-

* Why did you only take one knife from Raffaele's apartment for testing? How were you able to tell this one knife was the one used in the murder?

* You collected the knife and claimed Amanda or Raffaele had stabbed Meredith. If this was the case, why were Amanda and Raffaele never accused of stabbing Meredith during the interrogations and the statements you prepared for Amanda and Raffaele made no mention of stabbing Meredith?

* If you had a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele, how do you explain the massive level of corruption and misconduct which occurred in this case? Why did you have to resort to suppressing evidence, forging documentation and telling numerous lies.

* Why was Stefanoni unable to tell how much DNA was on the bra clasp and knife when asked about this in court?

* You opposed the following :-

Opening the knife
Testing the direction the glass in Filomena's room was broken
You had no objection when the Massei court refused audio tests from Nara's apartment
You allowed the bra clasp to rust which meant it could not be re-tested

Can you explain why did not want the evidence tested and do you not think it is unusual for the prosecution to oppose testing evidence?

* Why have you constantly changed motives?

* The evidence you used against Amanda and Raffaele was highly suspect. For instance, you used a knife with the following characteristics

Not matching the wounds
Not matching a bloody imprint on the bed
It had no blood
When C&V tested the knife it was negative for the human species
Only one knife was taken and by a suspcious coincidence happened to be the knife supposedly used in the murder

Why did you have to rely on dubious evidence totally lacking in credibility?
welshman
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:49 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby Purple » Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:03 pm

Why didn't you test the semen stain on the pillow?
Purple
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:35 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:03 pm

1. Why did they continue to hold Lumumba after Amanda recanted her statement incriminating him?
2. Why not just turn over complete DNA data files if there is nothing harmful to the prosecution's case in those files?
3. Why not videotape Amanda's and Raffeale's interrogations.
4. Why not give Amanda an English translation of the statement she signed?
5. Why not take the temperature of the body immediately to establish TOD?
6. Why not do a thorough work up of the break in site?
7. Why not agree to attempt to retrieve data from the fried computers?
8. Why tell Amanda she was HIV positive?
9. Why not arrest Rudy after the Milan incident?
10. Why not get tapes from the surveillance cameras in town to see who was going back and forth through town the night of the crime?
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: awkward questions

Postby welshman » Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:39 pm

* If Curalto was telling the truth, he gives Amanda and Raffaele an alibi for the time of the murder. Why were you using evidence which undermined your case?
welshman
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:49 am

Re: awkward questions

Postby pmop57 » Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:48 am

5. Multiple possible reasons, the first, total incompetence of the investigators (obviously this cannot be excluded in this case), the second, maintain a larger range of options to later construct a case (speculation), the third, they knew already when they arrived at the crime scene that time of death would cause problem, this implies they knew already who was or might have been implicated in committing the crime (corruption, conspiracy).

7. The question is, how was it possible to destroy the hard drives of four laptops, evidemce of the same crime the same way? An "errouneous manipulation to destroy one, possible, but four? The fact of destroying four pieces of evidence begs the question, was it really just haward, total incompetence or intention.
If it was intention (fraud) the question, the question is, why had the drives to be destroyed and in addition, who gave the order. There are multiple possible answers but they all will be of the domain of speculation.

8. To create fear and submission. Malice. Corruption, gaining money by selling the information. Planned character assassination. Knowing the persons she had had contact with (witnesses, who else could be implicated), excluding persons they suspected to have participated in committing the crime (checking if she had contact with such persons). Again you are very quickly in the domain of speculation and conspiracy.

The fact that still today dozens of questions have not been credibly answered show the total ansurdity of the case against AK and RS. The fact that still today many of the most feroce guilters are questionning and trying to explain/contest evidence says it all!
pmop57
 
Posts: 4868
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)


Return to Injustice in Perugia Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron