Amanda Knox Conviction: Motivazioni della Sentenza
So far this week, we’ve been through the alleged anti-American bias and so-called media circus in the Amanda Knox murder case.
Quick recap: While it seems many (not all) Knox supporters have backed off the anti-Americanism claim, many still don’t believe the experiences of those of us who live in Italy regarding media coverage. I don’t know why I (and other Americans living in Italy who commented on the post of their own free will) would have any motivation to lie about how much average Italians followed this case in our experience, but there you have it.
My final words on that: Yes, this was a big news story when it broke — the murder of a young girl always is — and it got bigger because of the international angle, making it one of the top stories to come of out of Italy in many years (mostly because let’s be honest — the world normally doesn’t care what happens in Italy). But as far as what average Italians were talking about and paying attention to, this just wasn’t on the radar. I’m sorry if that ruins your image of our morning cappuccino chats, but it’s true.
One thing before we move on regarding comments, though: thank you to everyone who stayed on-topic and gave their viewpoints on the last post. Much appreciated. And to those who commented with obviously false email addresses, you’re spammers to me, so that’s where your comments went. Blatant disregard of my rules will also send your comment to the rubbish bin.
Moving on…
The So-Called Conviction Based on Nothing
I was in in the United States when the Knox and Sollecito verdicts were announced. Following the announcement, I watched as some American commentators trashed the entire Italian criminal justice system because an innocent American girl was railroaded and just convicted on no evidence and all of Italy should be ashamed of itself and harumph! *crosses arms in indignation*
It was a well-crafted and well-executed play on emotions, but unfortunately not entirely based in reality. There was and is evidence on which the court based its decision. In fact, the court has since written it out for everyone to read — in the 400+ pages of the “motivazioni della sentenza,” which we’ll get to in a bit.
Before I get into what is in the decision, let me lay down some disclaimers about this post:
1. My goal here is mostly to provide those who haven’t been following the case or who haven’t been privy to what is contained in the sentencing report because they don’t read Italian an idea of what the Italian court believed and on what it based Knox’s conviction. From what I’ve read, particularly in the American press, the impression has been given that Knox was convicted based on her behavior and nothing more. This post is to clarify that the factfinders had more before them than just Knox’s behavior.
2. What I am including below is my personal translation of what I consider to be the major pieces of evidence on which Amanda Knox was convicted; there is obviously *much* more to the report, including various theories as to why Knox and Sollecito acted the way they did at different times. Some of those scenarios undoubtedly weighed more heavily into the decision than others (and it’s certainly personal opinion as to whether their scenarios make sense), but I’m focusing on physical evidence and eyewitness testimony, because, again, I don’t think they have been widely reported in English-speaking media.
In other words, I’m really not writing this post for those of you who live and breathe the case, as I’m sure those of you who disagree with the decision have an argument against every piece of evidence below — which by the way is entirely normal in a criminal trial.
3. I’m not addressing the evidence against Raffaele Sollecito or the case against Rudy Guede. This is not an indication that I think either or both of them was rightfully or wrongfully convicted — I’m just not covering it here. They certainly deserve their own posts, but I’m not the one to write them, at least not now.
4. This post will present what the judges wrote. Period. Whether or not you agree with the findings of the court is another matter entirely, and something many of you touched on in your comments throughout the week. You’re likely to get into that again in comments, but I’m not going to be commenting on it.
5. Whether or not I personally would have made the same findings of fact as the court did, I can’t say. In fact, I can’t know because I haven’t read the trial transcripts or have any indication of what witnesses sounded like, etc. I’m sorry I won’t take for granted what “journalists” have written about what went on in court. I just don’t trust either “side” with that information.
6. Even taking as true every finding of fact by this court, whether or not I personally would have voted to convict Amanda Knox based on the evidence the court accepted is not in discussion — and this is closely related to the previous point.
Without having access to trial records and transcripts, I simply don’t feel like I can make an adequate judgment about what I would have done in their shoes. I could, with transcripts and previous motions and all that fun stuff, take a position on what I’d find on appeal — but I don’t have them, so I won’t.
Once upon a time, I used to be an appellate law clerk who reviewed trial court decisions in order to offer my thoughts to the judge under whom I worked, and trust me, the trial court’s opinion was *never* enough to go by. Related to this point, remember in your reading of my very brief summary of the motivazioni, what the report is: it is the trial court defending its decision. It doesn’t necessarily mean the judges are right, and although the court has balanced the evidence, the way it presents is findings is partial to the way the judges believed things happened — entirely normal.
7. The motivazioni della sentenza isn’t officially translated into English yet, but keep an eye out on my Facebook page and Twitter, and I’ll let you know if/when it’s released. In the meantime, if anyone wants a copy of the report in Italian, you can download it here (this is a tip from a reader; I have not downloaded from there and can’t find where I did get it from. If you want a copy from me, just be in touch). If I have messed up any page numbers, please let me know as well; I just haven’t had the time to triple- and quadruple-check things like I would like.
Now, the motivazioni.
The Alibi
The court didn’t believe Knox and Sollecito’s joint alibi; as most of you probably know, both changed their stories on some points, but the important parts of the alibi include the following: they watched a movie on the computer, had a late dinner (even as late as 11 p.m.), were at Sollecito’s apartment the entire evening of the murder, and slept in until about 10 a.m. the following morning.
The court found the following evidence credible:
- Sollecito’s father called him at 8:42 p.m. the evening of the murder, and at that point a water pipe under the sink was already broken while the dishes were being washed; the court concludes this means they had already eaten dinner and were washing up at that time, debunking the “late dinner” contention (p. 69).
- Sollecito’s computer was last used at 9:10 p.m. meaning that there is no further proof that the couple was in Sollecito’s apartment after that time (p. 68).
- An eyewitness testified he saw the couple outside near a basketball court at around 9:30 p.m. until sometime around 11 or 11:30 p.m., but they were gone by midnight (pp. 69-71).
- Computer data shows that Sollecito’s computer was turned on at 5:32 a.m. and music was played for about a half hour (p. 73).
- Sollecito’s cell phone was turned on at 6:02 a.m. at which time he received an SMS that his father had sent the previous evening at 11:14 p.m. (p. 73).
- An eyewitness identified a girl who matched Knox’s description as waiting outside of his “generi alimentari” store (sells everything from food to cleaning and personal hygiene products) to open at 7:45 a.m. the following morning; he didn’t remember what, if anything, this girl bought, but he did say he saw her headed in the direction of where Knox and Kercher lived (pp. 74-75).
- Sollecito’s father called and spoke to Sollecito at 9:30 a.m.; this phone call was never mentioned by Knox in her statements, which the court concluded to mean she didn’t know about the call because she wasn’t in Sollecito’s apartment at the time (p. 74).
Based on this evidence accepted by the court, they found that neither Knox nor Sollecito were truthful about their whereabouts the evening of the murder and the morning after.
The Forensics
The court turned to forensics, and accepted the following into evidence:
- Three separate samples found in the small bathroom that showed Kercher’s and Knox’s DNA mixed, all that tested positive for human blood (pp. 198, 204); these were located in a sink, around the drain of a bidet, and on a Q-tip container on the sink. Two experts maintained that the stains in the sink and bidet appeared to be diluted blood and made of a single trace based on their shape (rising and falling together) (pp. 301-02).
- Several samples taken from the small bathroom showed Kercher’s blood not mixed with anyone else’s DNA matter (pp. 198, 204); one of them was on the light switch and another on a bathmat, which the court concluded meant someone entered the bathroom with Kercher’s blood on him or her (p. 300).
- A sample that showed a genetic profile mix of Knox and Kercher in the bedroom of one of the Italian roommates (p. 200) — the room that also had a broken window.
- Also in the Italian roommate’s room, a footprint uncovered with luminol toward the entrance of the room that resulted in a genetic profile of Knox and Kercher mixed (pp. 205-06).
- A footprint in the hallway leading out of the Italian roommate’s room that had been uncovered by luminol with the genetic profile of Knox (p. 206).
- In sum: 10 samples in the house that included Knox’s DNA; five that were mixed with Kercher’s (three of which tested positive for human blood), but none in the room where Kercher’s body was found (p. 221).
- A 31 cm knife recovered at Sollecito’s apartment that was shown to have Knox’s genetic material on the handle and Kercher’s genetic material on the blade (p. 201-03), although Kercher had never been to Sollecito’s apartment (p. 313). The court explicitly refuted any contamination could have happened (pp. 282-84; pp. 308-12).
- The court found that this knife was compatible with the fatal wound to Kercher (p. 313).
As I said, the court went through many, many other things in the sentencing report (as you might imagine with over 400 pages of material), but to me, these were the most damning for Knox — and again, my going through this evidence isn’t intended to support the prosecution’s case or the convictions but only to make clear that there was physical evidence and eyewitness testimony in front of the judges.
I simply can’t tell you from reading the report how strong the evidence was, how convincing the eyewitnesses were, etc. I can’t say if the court got the decision right, half-right, three-quarters wrong, or totally blew it. Again, to be perfectly clear, my point in sharing this information is to show people who haven’t seen this before what evidence the court had before it and on which it based its decision.
The defense challenged all the evidence and attempted to poke holes in the prosecution’s case as best it could, but at the end of the trial, the judges and jury didn’t believe their side — and in the report, the judges do explain why they didn’t buy the defense’s arguments along the way.
I’m sorry, I know that’s a really general statement, but there’s just so much in there, it’s impossible to go through it all here; I will say that in my opinion, whether I agree with its analysis or not, the court did an excellent job of covering its bases, so to speak, and didn’t give off any of the vehemence or anger one might have expected judging from claims that the Italian criminal justice system just had it out for this girl. The opinion, IMHO, was rather sober indeed.
And so, to bring this week to a close, the court in the Amanda Knox trial (Part I) formed a decision, and it *was* based on evidence — despite Mignini’s wild imagination and seriously crazy theories, a lot of which were implicitly if not explicitly discounted in the motivazioni. And as I wrote before, if you have problems with what the judges believed, that’s entirely another issue, and it will be dealt with on appeal.
*
Some final thoughts: We all know that miscarriages of justice happen all over the world, so if one happened here — regarding any of those convicted — I imagine we all hope it gets fixed on appeal. I always root for justice, and I keep hoping we just may find out the full truth of what happened that night in Perugia directly from whoever was involved.
The only thing I know for certain regarding this case is that my heart breaks for the Kercher family and friends. I can’t begin to imagine what they have gone through and will continue to go through with each passing birthday, holiday, and every single ordinary day in which they don’t get to see their daughter, sister, or friend laugh, smile, and simply be.
May Meredith rest in peace, and may her family and friends find comfort in their memories.
—————
As many previous commenters have mentioned, if you’re interested in another American perspective on the case that differs greatly from Candace Dempsey’s Murder in Italy, check out Angel Face: The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox by Barbara Latza Nadeau, a journalist based in Rome. I haven’t read this book, so I can’t give my personal review, but I think you can already get a feel for the tone based on the word “killer” in the title. UPDATED: I did read and do a short review of this book on the Bleeding Espresso Facebook page.
[PHOTO CREDITS via Creative Commons licenses: Perugia Corte d'Appello by B.Roveran on Flickr; Perugia by B.Roveran on Flickr; Perugia by B.Roveran on Flickr; Perugia by B.Roveran on Flickr]
68 Beans of Wisdom to “Amanda Knox Conviction: Motivazioni della Sentenza”
« Older CommentsRecipes
Hi Harry,
What do you think it meant when the police discovered Guede’s dna inside Meridith. Did it mean that Knox and Sollecito killed Meredith and Guede tried to stop them and ran out the door. OR Did it mean that Guede raped and murdered her, left his finger prints, sperm and dna at the scene, took her credit cards and cash out of her purse, then went dancing and party until his cash was low, then fled the country.
Hi Chris,
Rudy Guede didn’t leave his sperm at the crime scene.
Make sure you read the judges’ sentencing report once it’s published in English, so that you can become fully acquainted with the facts of the case.
Harry, Funny how the only thing you dispute is the sperm.
Well the sperm has to belong to someone, because if it would have belong to Sollecito,it would be in the judge’s sentencing report. Though lets be honest here. Meredith’s dna was found on the blade, therefore even though the dna didn’t come from blood cells, that must be the knife that stabbed her. Using that same reasoning. Rudy’s dna was found inside Meredith and there are untested sperm samples in the room. Since Rudy is convicted of sexual assault the sperm has to be his.
Hi Chris,
You really need to read the judges’ sentencing report.
Meredith’s DNA on the blade could have come from blood.
There is a stain on the pillow which may or may not be sperm. If it is sperm, it may belong to Giacomo Silenzi, who was Meredith’s boyfriend at the time.
Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede were all convicted of sexual assault.
Chris,Harry:
The question of whether Rudy Guede’s semen was present at the crime scene could be better answered if the trial record were available to the public.
Based on eye-witness accounts of journalists who attended the trial and examination of selected court documents provided to favored journalists by a corrupt prosecution team, the question of whether Rudy Guede’s sperm was present at the crime scene remains unanswered. Barbie Latza Nadeau had reported at one point that it was but it was later determined that the sample of Guede’s DNA found inside the victim was not derived from human sperm.
For reasons that remain unclear, authorities chose not to examine an apparent semen stain found underneath the victim. “Judge” Massei reasoned that since no one would be able to determine when the sperm was deposited that it would not have evidentiary value. In all of their efforts to tailor what they found to what they wanted to believe, this sample presented the greatest challenge.
Here are the words of Steve Moore, a former FBI agent who recently retired after a 25 year career:
“The physical evidence against Amanda and Raffaele is wrong, contrived, misinterpreted, and (to put it kindly) misstated. The other “evidence” is made up of (embarrassingly naïve) hunches and bias. The “DNA” evidence is particularly inaccurate. The alleged motive and modus operandi of Knox/Sollecito is so tortured (and constantly-changing) that it defies belief.”
“But Patrizia[Stefanoni] was not deterred by logic and fact. In court, she said that she knew that the luminol stain was blood “…because of its color.” Every trained forensic investigator (except, apparently Stefanoni) knows that luminol glows blue. Only blue. Not a different shade of blue for different substances…just blue. What Stefanoni said, she knew to be false, or she was so incompetent that she should not have been allowed to destroy a crime scene.”
“One of the responsibilities of the FBI is to investigate police misconduct, and it is one of the more difficult investigations an FBI Agent can be assigned. I myself have conducted some of these investigations. I have seen the misconduct of police and prosecutors. But I have never personally been involved in a case where the misconduct is as egregious and obvious as the Mignini actions in Perugia. This was not a search for truth. This was a crusade to convict.”
What kills me is that authorities are suing Amanda for saying that they slapped her on the back of the head. Mignini at one point also talked of suing Seattle area journalist Steve Shay for reporting that somebody said he was “mentally unstable” — an understatement. Mignini and his cohorts face unprecedented criticism yet they want to go after a girl in jail and her parents. The whole thing stinks.
If the cells would have came from blood, then common sense says? That luminol would have worked on the knife. It would have detected blood or bleach. Matter of fact skin cells would have been long gone before the Chlorine in the bleach was able to completely remove the traces of iron that the blood left behind.
Bleach is pretty much the only thing that can remove blood from a blade. You can come back decades later and detect blood if a surface hasn’t been cleaned in bleach. Even the police where trying to put bleach in Knox/Sollecito’s hands. I have read no report where they tested the blade with luminol and it came back positive. If you have read where bleach was detected on blade then I’m wrong. Matter of fact every report i’ve read on this case says that no blood was on the weapon. Therefore luminol test came back negative showing no bleach or blood was ever on blade. Since no blood was on blade then the sample could not have come from blood. Seriously they teach you this crap in high school biology.
PhanuelB on 03 Jul 2010 at 8:22 pm # said “I would like to pose a question to everyone here: Is it possible to smoke so much pot or drink so much alcohol that you kill someone the night before and wake up the next day with no memory of it? If anyone thinks so please stand up and say it. I don’t think it’s possible, particularly for two people”.
No, it would not be because of the pot and alcohol. People that rape and murder are prone to rape and murder. The drugs have nothing to do with it. Some people have no compassion for other people and are likely to do anything to anyone. Some parents kill their children. Some children kill their parents. Throughout history government sent men into battle to die for their for self gain. Ireland exported corn during the potato famine. During the 20th century almost 1/2 billion people died during war. Over half were civilians. The rape of Nanjing is a perfect example of the type of people that have power. Bush senior went to Hirohito’s funeral in 1992. Some people have no compassion. Eisenhower and Patton took part in a saber attack on the bonus army and ~100 men women and children were killed. Google United Fruit Company. “Let them eat cake” This is the world we live in. Drugs have nothing to do with it and greed has everything to do with it. Guede murdered Meredith for her money and a perverted sex act. He did this because he was capable and greedy. He took her life for very Little money. People have murdered for much less. Mignini has no compassion. etc etc etc.
Chirs C,
Every pot head in the world is scratching their head at this case. The last thing you are gonna do is walk down the street and kill someone after you have eaten and smoked some pot.
Are you sure it was plain, simple pot they were smoking? I’ve read multiple other accounts that what they smoked was hashish; or cannibis laced with something; skunk; or even something much stronger … do you have that information?
Knowing specifically what they smoked, when they smoked it, how much they smoked and what exact effect it had on their bodies and minds is all are important data points … and unfortunately for all three defendants, drug users are known to be less than truthful when disclosing such information. Knox had testified that she & Raffaele smoked “a spliff”, but didn’t elaborate beyond that.
PhanuelB
I would like to pose a question to everyone here: Is it possible to smoke so much pot or drink so much alcohol that you kill someone the night before and wake up the next day with no memory of it?
You are presenting a logical false choice. See my points listed above. I would not discount any action attributed to anybody under the influence of drugs. Here in the USA, you lose certain rights and privileges when you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol.You lose the right to drive a motor vehicle. You lose the right to sign a legal, binding contract. And you lose certain rights to testify in court under oath as well.
Uncle655321,
See this is the problem that most people dont realize. when you use words like skunk, pot, hashish, marijuana, ganja, hemp, and 1000 other nicknames/productnames, you are in fact talking about the cannibis plant. All those products have the same thing in common, THC. THC is the drug that gets everyone high in those drugs. The only difference between those drugs is that strength varies in some of them. The only reason to mention drugs in this murder is to strike fear in the hearts of jurors. Because nothing in that murder can be attributed to the use of THC.
Examples of Mignini’s screwed up drug theory.
Someone under the use of THC should drive wholes in the prosecutors theory of how this crime happened. There is a witness that has them at the other apartment at like 9? If they was under the influence thc, why would they walk down the street to have sex? Because they want to have a 3-way? Seriously what in Amanda Knox’s sexual history makes you think that she would try and have sex with her roommate with her boyfriend. She listed her sexual partners to a fake doctor the prosecution sent. 6 men. The whole drub/sex theory is completely bogus. The fact that the prosecution thought Knox/Sollecito committed this murder to have a sex game a week after they started dating just blows my mind. Seriously if Meredith or Knox where into those types of things, there would have been signs. I have dated girls that smoked pot. I use the word dating to mean they have stayed the night before at my house. You can’t get them to leave the house after smoking a joint even if you want to. Your screwed. They will have sex, but leaving is not an option. If you care for them enough that you already want them to stay the night, you are not going to try and add a 3rd partner.
The knife- I pull this comment off a drug abuse website. (marijuana intoxication can cause distorted perceptions, impaired coordination, difficulty in thinking and problem solving, and problems with learning and memory. Research has shown that marijuana’s adverse impact on learning and memory can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off.)
What makes you think anyone that was going to Meredith’s to have a sex/game that was already stoned, would decide to take a kitchen knife with them. Thats premeditation and even in court thats not what happened. 1st the knife was never in Amanda’s purse. That was proven. That means she got stoned. Then she grabbed a knife, and walked with it in her hand down the street. Got home killed meredith without leaving her dna in the room. She then performed a sexual act with Sollecito, Guede, and Meredith’s dead corpse. She then cleaned the knife off in the sink of the bathroom since thats the only place water and meredith’s blood was found. She cleaned it good enough without using bleach to remove all the blood from the knife. Then her and sollecito staged a break in that fits Guede supposed MO after Guede leaves. They then deposit 2 cell phones in the garden, take meredith’s keys, steal her money and credit cards. Discard Sollecito’s knife somewhere. They then return back to Sollecito’s put the knife back in the drawer and go to sleep. WAKE UP in the morning and return home. After all that you think a person would have woke up in the morning after been on a all night drug/sex/murder bing?
Chris C,
You missed my point completely.
Are you absolutely, 100% sure that what Knox & Sollecito smoked was pure medicinal grade marijuana? You KNOW for a fact that it was not laced with something stronger such as PCP , cocaine, or other significantly harder drug? You personally would be willing to testify in open court under threat of perjury that you KNOW exactly how much they smoked, who supplied it to them and so on?
I definitely have no way of being certain about any of that, you probably don’t; but, and most importantly, the jury didn’t, and they made the determination that the drugs that were used went beyond the casual, “harmless” variety. Now, if you choose to believe that the drugs they abused would not have led them into violent actions, that’s certainly your opinion.
~Uncle
spliff”, was defined in one of the news articles as tobacco mixed with marijuana. Raffaele had some hashes which is concentrated THC which is the chemical in marijuana that gets people high. THC blocks electrical impulses in the brain which causes less brain activity. THC is a sedative and has a calming / relaxing effect. An excessive amount of THC would induce sleep. In reality THC would cause a homicidal psychopath like Guede to become less aggressive and less likely to kill. THC causes people to be forgetful and loose their concept of time. It could seem to a person on THC that it takes 15 minutes for something to happen that only took one minute. Many studies (some unrealistic) have been conducted about the effects of THC. It is physically non addictive however some mentally defective people think they have a dependence on it but their dependency is equivalent to them thinking they have a dependency on placebos (sugar pill). placebos are used to test new drugs. In a control group, for example 100 people, 50 are treated with placebos and 50 with the new drug. Some of the 50 treated with placebos recover from the disease, some of the 50 treated the new drug recover. They crank the data through an equation which somehow determines the effectiveness of the new drug.
If you conducted an experiment where you gave a group of people a placebos and told them it’s a happy pill, many of the people would start thinking they are happy and acting silly. What you are seeing is the effect of suggestion. Prosecutor Mignini is practiced at the at of deception. He gives people lines of bull and some of them believe it. It’s not because the people that believe him are mentally deficient but because some people are more susceptible to suggestion than others.
The art of suggestion (deception in some cases) is studied in great detail by people employed in fields such as advertising, religion and politics.
Governments are well aware that young children are very susceptible to suggestion. They make sure the subjects taught in schools leads them to believe their government loves them and is looking out for them. For example, prior to the start of the aggression by the Japanese emperor the children were taught he is the only living god, all other races are inferior and that god wanted them destroyed. Historically it was common fro two armies to meet on the battle field with god on both sides. Some soldiers had a problem with slaughtering men women and children so they were taught the people were heretics and the mass executions went much smoother. Over the years suggestion/deception proved to be a very effective tool for governments. Enough, it’s sickening to think about it.
Michelle:
I just noticed something that deserves comment. You say that the Knox supporters have “backed away from the anti-Americanism claim.” That’s not accurate.
You were saying that we had made the claim and we were saying “no we never said that.” Trust me, there are nasty things to say about the Perugian justice system, but almost all of us are quick to point out that judicial mistakes occur throughout the world.
I stand by what I wrote.
BTW, Michelle, I detect a bit of deception on your part. Prove me wrong. Translate the parts of the Motivation report that is silly, irrational, illogical, unfounded, etc. and post it here. If you choose to do this (ha ha) I hope you have plenty of times on your hands because the job will be massive.
Perugia authorities / Mignini’s logic example. When a phone connects with a cell tower it connected with in the past it indicated the phone is where I want it to be unless I want the phone to be somewhere else. If a phone does not connect with the same cell tower it connected with for the last six calls from that location the phone is at that location because it suits my purpose for the phone to be there.
More twisted logic. It is possible to know about an event that occurred at 12:07 pm on Nov 2 2007, based on a phone call that was made at 11:50 am Nov 2 2007
)))))
More twisted logic. The initial coroners report said Meredith was killed no more than 2-3 hours after she last ate. Meredith last ate at 6 pm so the time of death is understood to be 11 pm.
))))))
More twisted logic. Meredith was laying on her bed fiddling with her phone when she accidentally called her bank and accidentally entered the wrong area code, so this proves she was alive at 10 pm. This call connected with cell tower 30064. Earlier in the day four calls made from Meredith’s apartment with the same phone connected with cell tower 25621 and one call connected with 25620, none connected with 30064, so this proves the phone was in Meredith’s apartment at 10 pm when she accidentally called her bank and entered the wrong area code. Also the signal strength for cell tower 30064 was measured outside the apartment, in the yard, up to the window of Meredith’s room to prove the apartment location is compatible with cell tower 30064
)))))
Interesting that both PhanuelB and you suddenly found something to criticize of mine 60+ comments into this post. I’ve already explained several times why I posted this — and why I’m not posting anything else. P.S. I don’t have to prove anything to you or anyone else.
Uncle,
If Knox or Sollecito would have been on anything other than THC it would have been reported. If they was on pcp, Mignini would have told the press it was PCP. After all false information that Mignini leaked to the press, you dont think he would have listed a specific hard drug if he had proof. Is there anywhere in the court documents it lists a specific drug, if so please report it. The fact that they are saying possibly laced, means they found no evidence other than THC. People that take drugs are taking because of 2 reasons. They are addicted and/or they are chasing the High. Most drugs that cause violent behavior are hallucinogens. Using the pcp theory, ONE person could go on a psychotic rampage if they had an adverse reaction or they was a chronic user. However, whats the likelyhood of 2 people both having a adverse reaction at the same time, going on a rampage. Now add in the fact that Hallucinogens cause staggering, unsteady gait, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, hallucinations, euphoria and loss of balance. Do you really believe that 2 people suffering from these affects and also suffereing from adverse effects of a psychotic break are coherent enough to walk together and commit that crime. Now you have to take in the fact that the majority of psychotic breaks caused by PCP are performed by people that have histories of aggressive violence. Neither Knox or Sollecito have that type of history in their background.
So now you are saying that 2 people that have no history of violence, both suffered a psychotic break, (after knox talked to some girl at the door around 9pm and sollecito talked to his dad on the phone) WALKED to meredith’s house with 2 knives, entered the premises, killed and raped meredith, stabbed rudy in the hand and let him go, cleaned up the scene, staged a break in, walked back to Sollecito’s house, went to bed, knox then woke up early in the morning and returned to take a shower. They did all this suffereing the bad effects of PCP/hallucinations.
FACT – THC is a sedative
FACT – PCP tests can detect pcp in a users body for up to 90 days.
Chris C,
Do you really believe that 2 people suffering from these affects and also suffereing from adverse effects of a psychotic break are coherent enough to walk together and commit that crime?
Me personally, I’m not saying that at all. It is what the jury believed.
Is there anywhere in the court documents it lists a specific drug, if so please report it.
Right, where in the court transcripts in which the specific drug cocktail is confirmed and validated? That is exactly my point: What Knox & Sollecito did was raise the cloud of doubt in the jury’s mind and put the jury in the unenviable position of having to evaluate, assess and determine if they well and truly did smoke simple, pure cannabis. Or maybe it was just hashish? Or maybe it was hashish mixed with tobacco? Or maybe it was hashish mixed with cannabis? That is problematic for the defense attorneys, and will continue to be during the appeal.
You are certainly correct in that some people become placid and calm and sleepy when on certain drugs. Other people get violent and destructive on certain drugs.
I believe the intention of Michelle’s post – is that the jury rejected the defense’s position that K & S smoked a simply, harmless, sleep-inducing cannabis joint. Disagree with the jury’s logic and decision all you want.
This is why drug tests are required for certain job applications and other obligations: there is a clear and unambiguous assessment and record of what drugs – if any – are present in your body. Who knows what would have showed up had K & S taken a drug test that night?
So now you are saying that 2 people that have no history of violence…?
Again, it is not me that is saying that. But I will say that violent crimes have definitely been committed by people without having a previous violent tendencies, and is not without precedent. It is not very likely, but then again, I wouldn’t discount anything that people under the influence of alcohol or drugs are capable of doing. You can choose to believe that it is not possible. The jury believed it was.
~Uncle
Since when is it the defenses job to prove it? Under a system in which you are suppose to be innocent until proven guilty. Its the Prosecutions job to prove what they present to the jury. Thats what has me so baffled. They didn’t prove anything. Thats what i’m trying to show here. Knox and Sollecito claim they smoked pot. Prosecution claims they smoked more than pot. The only evidence presented is that they have smoked pot. Shouldn’t the burdon of proof be on the prosecution to prove they smoked more than pot. If they can’t prove it, then why are they allowed to present it as evidence or base a theory on it. Then present that theory as evidence. All the prosecution did was present a bunch of theories and then throw the evidence at the jury. None of the evidence matched any of their theories. This case is the anti-OJ Case. Rather than the defense throwing about a bunch of wild theories and smoke screens at physical evidence. Instead, the prosecution threw up wild theories and smoke screens at physical evidence or lack of physical evidence. Rather than the defense using the media to character assissinate the prosecution, instead the prosecution character assassinated the defendents.
I dont blame the media. Never have! It wasn’t anti-american bias. It was a media that was given false or misleading information from the prosecution and other people that thought Knox was guilty. There are tons of information that turned out to be false and it has been showed that it was the people involved in the prosecution that handed out this information. I originally thought knox was guilty when I heard all this stuff in the media. Only problem is. I’m still waiting on the facts that prove guilt. There are no facts that prove guilt. Just wild theories that ALL have been proven to not work with the evidence. All the media coverage i heard on this case was either knox was psychotic killer and pulled sollecito into this whole thing. Thats all i heard about right up to jury deliberations. Then the American media was left wanting. They waited 2 years for the evidence and was left with nothing.
Even I have to admit Mignini was brilliant. However, we all know, even the Knox haters, that eventually they will set Sollecito and Knox free. There is just to many unanswered questions in the case. Mignini will be able to save face because he can always say i got a conviction.
Anyone else thinking this has run its course in this comments section? Because I sure am….
Michelle:
Just my two cents but this has NOT run its course. I’m in the middle of translating some of the pages you referenced above from that cheap crime novel known as the Motivation Document.
BTW.. I’ve had the chance to look at some of the rest of your web site/blog and it’s very nice.
I assume you did know that if you touched this subject that what you got here was inevitable. I personally think that the public debate is important and legitimate. It’s democracy in action and there is a profound injustice to be reversed.
Actually it’s not inevitable. I can just turn off comments
Those of you who live and breathe the case have lots of other forums to argue on — you don’t need to do it here on my blog.
I’m sorry to those of you who still have valuable insights to be made, but I’m no longer interested in refereeing the comments here, so I’m closing them. If you’d like to email me, feel free, but if you’d like to continue arguing your side of the case — whichever that may be — I suggest you go find one of the many forums dedicated to this case online.
Thank you all for reading, but I’m starting this week fresh and clean of stress, and that includes not having to wade through countless comments that have nothing to do with what I posted.