Sunday, December 28, 2008

New Pressure Now On Rudy Guede To Start Talking?

Posted by Peter Quennell


[click above for Guede profile]

There’s a new report in the Italian press that Guede is apparently now transferred to the sex offenders wing of the prison mentioned below.

It seems that sex offenders are not great favorites among the other prisoners, so the point of such a move might be to protect him rather than to give him an additionally hard time.

Or could this be more pressure on him to start talking? Guede seems to have made remarks to his lawyer in the last several days intended to convey to the Kerchers that he is sad for them at what happened.

Prosecutor Mignini has a reputation among people who actually know him and regard him with respect for above all wanting justice and closure for the families of victims.

And for wanting to know precisely what happened. He is not really known for being among the most vengeful of prosecutors, or for seeking particularly harsh sentences.

If Mr Mignini is not having periodic chats about what is best for Meredith’s family with the Kerchers’ lawyer Mr Maresca, it would be uncharacteristic of him.

Closure for some victims’ families can be above all a matter of knowing what happened and why, and of hearing some real contrition from the perp or the perps.

Mr Mignini seems to us just right for this kind of outcome, and the Kerchers have several times seemed to suggest that they think so, too.

May the whipsawing, if that is what it is, please continue…

Posted by Peter Quennell on 12/28/08 at 04:20 PM in The officially involvedThe prosecutors

Comments

May the Kerchers receive the closure they so much deserve. Over many months the sweet victim and her loving family have hardly received any mention here. This case has to be one of the starkest in terms of right and wrong and for me it is so sad that the US press has been blowing its coverage.

Posted by Anne on 12/28/08 at 04:57 PM | #

Good point, The worst of the coverage might be over now but we’ll continue to whack laggards. If found guilty, Knox might be fascinating for a while but these things all seem to fade.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/28/08 at 05:23 PM | #

The thoughts of Rudy testifying against them and 30-plus years in the sex offenders wing must be shaking up the defendants and their families. This is pressure on them too.

Posted by Godfrey on 12/28/08 at 05:27 PM | #

I’d imagine that Sollecito and Knox are distinctly closer to a melt-down now if this news has reached them

Do they have sex offender wings in womens’ prisons? There never seem to be very many women sex offenders here. Less than one a year that I’ve ever noticed.

Sounds like Knox is not wildly popular with her cell-mates already. If found guilty, might Knox end up in a Knox-only wing?

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/28/08 at 06:04 PM | #

It is time for Rudy to start talking, for the sake of Meredith’s family.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 12/29/08 at 07:07 AM | #

We may be nearing the end of the road for this sad murder case. It sounds like Guede is facing up to the fact that he will be potentially spending the next 30 years of his life behind bars. I am betting he starts talking before the trial of his cohorts, while he still has some leverage, for any sort of reduction in his sentence. He is clearly guilty; the reports are that they found his DNA on and in Miss Kercher. He needs to confess to have any chance at an earlier release. He needs to confess to give her parents a resolution to this sad senseless crime that claimed their daughter. AK47 and Sollecio seem so deluded, they may not clearly remember exactly what they did. I think Guede remembers exactly what happened.

Posted by Greggy on 12/29/08 at 04:07 PM | #

In an interview, just before Guede gets convicted, his solicitor discussed his plans to appeal against the verdict, in case Guede was proven guilty. It is also this same solicitor who apparently encouraged Guede to take the fast-track trial.

Guede doesn’t seem to me to be as strong-willed as Knox, nor to have a father who is taking care of orchestrating all the legal matters as is the case for Sollecito; he has no friends or family supporting him; his lawyer is the only person who claims to believe his innocence - this leaves Guede entirely at the mercy of his lawyer, and he will probably do whatever his lawyer will tells him to do.

Should Guede’s lawyer be planning an appeal against the guilty verdict, then he’ll probably have to wait & tailor this appeal strategy according to the outcome of Knox & Sollecito’s trial on January 16th. A confession from Guede before then would be tactical suicide - it rules out the appeal option.

Guede’s lawyer has probably told him that he has better chances if he keeps his mouth shut for now, and Guede will do what his lawyer tells him to do.

Posted by Socrates42 on 12/29/08 at 06:52 PM | #

I think Socrates’ perspective may be more correct than the perspective I proposed in my previous post. I was looking at the situation from Guede’s viewpoint. It sounds like he is in bad shape languishing in jail and starting to realize the longevity of his incarceration. But his cooler-minded lawyer is probably calling the shots, as Socrates pointed out. I suppose from his layer’s perspective, he wants to hear what AK47 and Sollecito have to say; and then adjust Guede’s story as necessary. Sollecito says he is going to testify. It will be enlightening if Sollecito’s lawyers let him do that.  I am still expecting a last minute plea by Sollecito selling out Knox. Guede would like these two to hang themselves with their actions, the evidence, and potential testimony during the upcoming trial. As long as neither one cracks and confesses, his lawyer can continue to paint the story of the innocent guy who just happened to be taking a dump when a murder occurred. I don’t think this approach will work any better during an appeal because of the DNA evidence, but Guede has little leverage if he continues to maintain his innocence. It is about time for the Italian Police to once again discreetly release another piece of the evidence puzzle to the press to put the pressure on these three to confess and slightly sway the Jury for the upcoming trial.

Posted by Greggy on 12/30/08 at 12:42 AM | #

Interesting assessments by Greggy and Socrates.

Of course the appeal does not freeze things in time and make Guede a non-player until then. This is a bargaining situation.

In part because the prosecutor wants three things: a complete narrative of the crime, a slam-dunk conviction of AK and RS, and words of contrition expressed to the Kerchers.

And in part because Guede can help deliver all three. If Guede keeps silent until the appeal, that power will all dissipate, and he’s going to be dead meat with the crime scene fully recreated. He only has any power up to the point where he testifies (or doesnt testify) at the trial of AK and RS.

The prosecutor seems to be tightening the screws. And we are hearing that Guede is increasing in despair and already starting to send the white-flag signals mentioned in the post.

Weakness? Or a smart survival move? Probably both.  It was Biscotti and Gentile, by the way, that conveyed the news of Guede’s new psychological state to the outside world.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/30/08 at 03:21 AM | #

Howdy…just got into this case after spending a week in bed ill. First post ever on this topic.

Why is everyone expecting here RG to be the magic bullet?

Why didn’t he really bury AK and RS during his initial trial/incarceration if he had so much truth/evidence against them? Why the heck would he protect them so much - a loser who had only known Amanda apparantly for a couple of months maybe? I’ve known people who have turned others in after knowing them for years for way less reasons. Esp druggies like this one.

Only reason I can think of is this guy killed MK, prolly horrifically. He was held earlier by police when he was found earlier weeks before skulking around with a knife.

While debatable traces of DNA of AK and RS were found his was awash everywhere, including on and in the suspect. If there was a huge coverup, how did they manage to cover up selectively the majority of their own evidence but not his? The bra and the knife are going to be BS. 

My gut reaction from reading tons and tons of sites over the past week is, this is the main guy, they got him. Motive, robbery and rape - “crimes of opportunity”.

Concerning AK and RS, they’re a weird couple of kids. As an american I’ve met gals like AK who strike me as being drama queenish, book smart but not street smart, scatterbrained, and want to please everyone at all times. I think this combination helped dig a hole for them initially, and then panic driven on by the insane pressure put on them by an insanely biased media and obviously hostile police, made a bunch of totally harebrained mistakes. There’s just no motive that makes sense. 

So back again, why is RG this amazing silver bullet when he has a life history of being a loser, lying druggie? How the heck can the prosecution hope to make him a lynch pin?

D

Posted by Deunan on 12/30/08 at 06:01 AM | #

Hello Deunan,
I hope you are feeling better after your illness and that our musings amused you during your convalescence. For the first 10 months I followed this case, I felt as I think you do: that Guede was the sole killer. I thought the Prosecutor was a sex-obsessed nut case and that AK and RS were stoners and not involved.

Now, however, I think all three were involved in a menage a trois gone bad after Miss Kercher lambasted them for it. The crime scene clean-up evidence, lack of memory of the night, and weird behavior, is going to look suspicious to the Jury at AK and RS’ trials. So RG is the lynchpin because he is already convicted and the others won’t confess.

I think the major reason neither of the three have tried to make a plea bargain yet is because they are confused at how they can make their involvement seem minimal. If Guede confesses, I think it will break AK and RS if they are guilty. One thing non-psychopathic people who kill don’t realize is how terrible they feel after committing the act and how desperately they want to forget their involvement. But when all the facts come out in a confession and they are questioned closely, it is is too strong a current to swim against.

Posted by Greggy on 12/30/08 at 06:46 AM | #

Hmmm….posting that after laying in bed and having this thing murder swirl around my head has been catharctic.

Having the occassional brushes with the law myself this is what I think:

AK: Ditzy, well educated, well meaning student who is in way over her head. As I stated before: drama queenish, book smart but not street smart, scatterbrained, and wants to please everyone at all times. When I was an RA saw tons of gals like her, very easy to take advantage of or manipulate. Very easy to please by playing to their narcissic nature. No way she could have murdered someone let alone be a party of it. She would have been an emotional wreck, babbling on the floor. No way could she have held it up without spilling everything. The “initial confession” was bullshit. I have a feeling how they did it: “give us scenarios and say how you could have done it”, or “here are certain scenarious, tell us how with you in them they fit.” “Just scenarious mind you…and then you can leave”....totally works like that all the time. A gal who has so little experience with the police she just rolls over no matter what. For example - taking all the blame for that party in Seattle. Tool. She just couldn’t shut up with a cop in front of her.

RS: Computer geek. Read a lot of manga. Carried a knife around him and had a knife collection. Ultimate poser. Good looking guy in his twenties and it took an american coed to get him laid? Criminal mastermind? NOT. Knowitall - has to answer every fucking question with an answer even if he doesn’t know the right answer. Another great way to bury yourself.

RG: Small time hood who was noted for constantly bothering women, carried around with him a butchers knife, tried to supplement his income via drugs, thievery, etc, and also used harder drugs like cocaine. Only one to flee the murder after the occurrence. Small time hood who would not have the balls to do something major unless prompted to it.

Holloween: Night when all students are expected to be out partying their asses off til real late. Also end of month for getting rent money. Dealers would know this from their freaking clientel. End of month most likely when students get money from home.

My guess:

I think RG did it. It was basically a crime of opportunity. I also bet he had someone else in there with him, he was too much of a putz to have the balls to do it alone. Most likely one of his druggie street corner buds who is currently laughing his ass off somewhere at him b/c this person is the one who can identify him without a doubt that he was the murderer. So to save his punk ass RG fingers others after learning more on what’s going on and lawyering up. Love to know what other DNA stuff is around that house…esp. cuz right now its just focused on MK, AK, RS, and RG. A college house where AK had “brought tons of strange men around”? That place must look like DNA grand central station. Broken window? Why not throw a rock against it to ensure no one is there before robbing it? The pictures of the place make me think “rob me”.

RG runs into MK by accident and then starts off on his fantasies. Knife pricks could have come when they couldnt find enough valuables/cash and tried to prompt her. Buddy holds her while RG goes to town. Buddy holds her while he has to take a dump cuz he’s all jacked up. Love to see if they found coke in his blood that he left everywhere because I think the reason MK didn’t have sperm in her was because he had limp coke dick.

After this it became a media and prosecution circus, not just local but international - and because of AK flopping around like an idiot every little discrepancy is then fitted to a case of how she could have done it. To the point of finding the real murderer and still trying. to. fit. how. she. could. have. done. it. To a painful and excruciating detail. Still no one can fit the motive yet.

Phew…. bring on the trial and lets see what the hell happens.

D

Posted by Deunan on 12/30/08 at 07:14 AM | #

Hey Greggy,

Just saw your post.

A three way with whom? RG, AK and RS? MK walked in and freaked out, so they killed her after stripping her? Or all three were going away at it and they tried to get her to join in forcibly? That doesn’t make sense to me at all.

D

Posted by Deunan on 12/30/08 at 07:20 AM | #

Deuman summarizes well some fast-fading and increasingly improbable defense attempts to make Guede either look like sole perp or perp with a mystery collaborator.

Remember, most of the voluminous evidence is still hidden except to the parties, it has made defense lawyers very pensive, and it has been increasing steadily with new witnesses.

Remember, the luminol evidence is proof beyond doubt that there was a major clean-up attempt, one that Guede clearly did not do because obvious evidence against him was left intact.

Remember, independent experts have reviewed much of the physical evidence, luminol evidence included, and they have confirmed that it hangs true and can be relied upon.

Remember, nearly a dozen judges, Supreme Court included, have reviewed all of the evidence then current against AK and RS and each of them confirmed at that point that it was powerful.

Remember, there are four or five motive scenarios, including anger, drugs, jealousy, and psychological disturbance, and it’s unlikely that anyone will still buy the no-motive defense. 

And remember, Guede actually tried very hard at his trial to finger AK and RS and exclude himself - but his judge noted that that there was strong evidence against both him and the defendants.

As the US defense lawyer Theodore Simon remarked on NBC, the line of attack Deuman nicely summarizes increasingly looks like whack-a-mole and will not serve the defendants well.

And if Rudy sings like a canary at trial, that defense is dead meat and history. My guess? For the very powerful reason Greggy provides, all three will end up talking their heads off.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/30/08 at 12:04 PM | #

Hi Deunan

I agree with Fast Pete & Greggy - the evidence implicating RS & AK are just too strong & numerous to support the sole perpetrator theory. Not only were there multiple perpetrators, but experts confirm the presence of AK & RS at the murder scene.

As for AK being this dizzy, nerdy, narcissistic-natured girl, that too I agree with. But I really don’t see how these characteristics should rule out her being a potential perpetrator in this crime! If anything, they support the theory that it was precisely due to her dizziness & narcissistic nature that she should commit such a foolish and cruel crime, expecting all the while that her nerdishness should provide an adequate cover-up. AK definitely thinks she’s smart; she thinks her clean-up efforts will help her set free. But as you correctly noted, she is not street-wise, her over-confidence is her weakness. People are not stupid, they can see right through her lies. She was caught red-handed with Sollecito outside the cottage on the morning of November 2nd 2007 with a mop in the door-way - they were still mopping-up the evidence, so to speak, when the postal police unexpectedly landed at their front-door. Sure, they would have eventually called the Calibrini police, but not until all clean-up was done - they were interrupted.

RG’s DNA was indeed found on the victim’s body. That he probably attempted to sexually assault her has also been confirmed. Don’t you think it’s odd for a house which was swarmed with students, as you pointed out, to have not a single finger print of AK & RS in AK’s bedroom? Isn’t odd that, besides MK’s room & the little shower-room next door, everywhere else in the cottage was immaculately bleached & no finger prints were to be found anywhere? Hmmm… that’s weird enough to raise anyone’s alarm bells. If only the postal police hadn’t arrived, I bet the shower-room would have been scrubbed & bleached too. Would they have then moved on to MK’s room? Oh no…..I can almost hear AK saying: “Let’s leave Guede’s print on the pillow resting below MK’s head..it matched his DNA on MK’s body…Ah! this is picture-perfect! Aren’t we a couple of very clever, middle-classed, genius youngsters Sollecito? The money spent on our high-brow education has certainly not gone to waste!”

Remeber too that AK was menstral on November the 1st & 2nd as per her blood that was found on RS’s boxer-shorts. Now add to her hormonal imbalance her previously discussed dizziness, narcisstic obsession, jealousy & anger at MK, in addition to a cocktail of drungs & alcohol - BOOM! Et voila your ‘motive’.

With such conditions underlying the event, I can sadly conclude that although the assault was not pre-meditated, these conditions alone are sufficient to put someone like AK in the state of mind where she could explode in the face of her unruly emotions. Just because she doesn’t remember much doesn’t imply that she didn’t do anything. In fact, it is precisely because she was so off-her-head, that she could bring herself to doing something as vicious & cruel as this crime. Remember that it is also precisely because she was so off-her-head on drugs and booze that she got arrested by the police in her home town in the U.S before she left for Italy.

This is very telling - it shows us that in the heat of the moment, and given her unstable state of mind due to being intoxicated among other things, she is capable of committing regretable acts - yes, then, she’s book-wormish but not wise, narcissistic & hence manipulative, debaucherous and un-heeding, and as a consequence, dangerously volatile!

Posted by Socrates42 on 12/30/08 at 02:46 PM | #

Hi again Deunan,

I just saw your last comment:
“A three way with whom? RG, AK and RS? MK walked in and freaked out, so they killed her after stripping her? Or all three were going away at it and they tried to get her to join in forcibly? That doesn’t make sense to me at all.”

I agree that something about the menage-a-trois orgy session doesn’t make sense, but I don’t think that this means that AK & RS were not involved.

One thing which has puzzled me since the outset is that when they found the victim, she was only wearing her T-Shirt (soaked in blood and gathered around her shoulders), whilst her jeans (torn and bloodied) were found nearby, and most importantly her bra (torn off with a knife into two pices, a small bra clasp piece + a larger piece) was also found covered in blood near the body. Now in order for these to be covered in the victim’s blood, she must have either been wearing them when she was stabbed, or someone soiled them with her blood after they were taken off her (this is highly doubtfull) - both these two possibilities do not support the scenario the prosecutors have put forward (that her bra was cut off, her jeans taken off, then she was raped, and then finally stabbed).

It seems to me that there could possibly be another layer to the cover-up effort which involved the victims bra & jeans being taken off after she was stabbed & left to die. Only this could explain the blood that was trickling down the jeans, and all over the bra. This begs the question ‘Why would anyone see the need to do that’?

Posted by Socrates42 on 12/30/08 at 03:53 PM | #

The idea of Guede being the sole perpetrator is attractive but beguiling. It matches our stereotypes and prejudices: low life black drug dealer and petty criminal in bungled robbery turned sex murder. An image that the defence teams of the other suspects has tried to contrast with their clean cut (as they try to portray) bewildered and innocent clients. Unfortunately for them, the actions of their clients do not match this image. Hence the never ending PR campaign from Seattle and denial of facts.

That there was a cleanup is pretty much indisputable; chains of footprints disappearing, moved objects, no fingerprints around and a recurrence of bleach. Guede didn’t do the cleanup because he was attempting to establish an alibi at a club. Which leaves the other two with the task of exlaining away damning evidence, a knife with DNA, multiple lies and two stories that do not match even each other let alone the evidence. It’s going to be an uphill struggle.

Posted by Faustus on 12/30/08 at 04:07 PM | #

Hi Socrates,

There is no doubt whatsoever that Meredith was sexually assaulted by Rudy Guede. This is not some fanciful scenario put forward by the prosecutors. Rudy Guede was convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering Meredith in a court of law.

Incidentally, the prosecutors claimed that Rudy sexually assaulted Meredith. They didn’t use the word rape, although they didn’t exclude the possibility either. It couldn’t be determined by the medical examiner whether the penetration was genital or manual.

Meredith’s jeans were on the floor, which was covered in her blood. This explains why Meredith’s blood was on her jeans.

Posted by The Machine on 12/30/08 at 04:32 PM | #

Hi The Machine,

I have no doubt that the victim was assaulted, but as you say, no penetration was confirmed.

Rudy was convicted of the assault for reasons which Paolo Micheli states in an interview:

Q: Do you think the prosecution’s reconstruction is plausible?

A: There are some doubts about the dynamics and the position of the victim’s body when she was stabbed. These are however not sufficent to repudiate the hypothesis of sexual assault.

Q: In fact, you found Rudy guilty of sexual assault even though the results from the autopsy were not conclusive on this point.

A: Sexual assault is also an ‘invasion’ of the body as was described in the autopsy. It is certain that the rapist pulled the victim’s top up. Some blood had also run down onto the trousers. It’s therefore plausible to think that whoever violated the victim put their hand down her trousers.

I’m not casting doubt on her being assaulted. What I found puzzling is, as Micheli puts it:

“There are some doubts about the dynamics and the position of the victim’s body when she was stabbed.” and “Some blood had also run down onto the trousers. It’s therefore plausible to think that whoever violated the victim put their hand down her trousers.”  So the victim was wearing her trousers, according to Micheli, when she was assaulted.

This suggests that when someone had put their hand down the victim’s trousers, she still had them on, and blood “had run onto” then - otherwise how could it be explained that “Some blood also run down onto the trousers”? It is clear that Micheli is not suggesting that the trousers got soiled in blood because there was blood on the bedroom floor.

The question I raised is not whether she was assaulted or not, but rather ‘why would someone assault her, stab her, and THEN take off her trousers and bra?’.

Posted by Socrates42 on 12/30/08 at 05:41 PM | #

It seems there is still some confusion as to why Guede has been charged with sexual assault and not “rape”. Someone may also still be wondering why AK and RS have been charged with the same crime since only Guede’s DNA has been found inside Meredith’s body.

Well, not surprisingly in the mind of the Italian legislators any sexual act forced upon someone is considered a “violenza contra personam” or violence against a person.

For this reason, there’s no need to find sperm in the victim body in order to decide that victim as been “raped”. From the Italian legal standpoint, manual penetration, oral sex or any other unwanted sex-related activity forced upon a third party are equivalent to rape.

I’m providing below the original and translation of the relevant article of Italian law regulating sexual violence crimes or “crimini di violenza sessuale”, hoping that it will help to clarify the matter.

CP Legge 66/1996 art.609b

“Chiunque, con violenza o minaccia o mediante abuso di autorità, costringe taluno a compiere o subire atti sessuali é punito con la reclusione da cinque a dieci anni…la pena é della reclusione da sei a dodici anni se i fatti di cui all’articolo 609bis sono commessi:con l’uso di armi o di sostanze alcoliche, narcotiche o stupefacenti o di altri strumenti o sostanze gravemente lesivi della salute della persona offesa”.

“Whoever, by means of violence or threats or abuse of authority, forces a third party to commit or suffer sexual acts is punishable by detention from 5 to ten years… the punishment by means of detention from six to 12 years applies if the above mentioned facts are connected to the use of weapons, alcoholic substances or drugs, or any other means or substances employed that seriously damage the health of the offended person”.

No doubt that Guede, Knox and Sollecito fall in the six-to-12 punishment option, since Meredith has suffered the ultimate damage: death. That’s added onto the sentence for murder, of course.

Posted by Nicki on 12/30/08 at 06:41 PM | #

“The question I raised is not whether she was assaulted or not, but rather ‘why would someone assault her, stab her, and THEN take off her trousers and bra?’.” Socrates

Indeed, this is one of the reasons it looks as if Meredith’s murderers tried to alter the crime scene after the fact.

The broken window in Filomena’s bedroom is another. The footprints, the mop, and other items of evidence provide other clues that more than one person was involved. The lone wolf theory, which was never compelling, has been discredited by everyone involved.

Why would someone try and cover a botched burglary attempt, which incidentally ended in a brutal murder, by taking the time to make it look as if he or she had broken into the cottage rather than having been let in?

If the motive was burglary, why was so little taken? Indeed, Raffaele Sollecito, who called the police after the arrival of the postal police to report a burglary, said that nothing had been taken. How did he know this? Meredith’s door was still locked and her body had yet to be discovered.  Why did the burglar not take other visible items, such as AK’s laptop?

These questions just skim the surface, of course, but they provide some clues as to why investigators believe that Meredith Kercher was assaulted and tortured by people who knew her and who had no trouble entering her domicile. If Rudy Guede acted alone, which is the simplest scenario, then this case would have been resolved a long time ago.

One of the most persistent myths about this case is that Mignini is “going after” Amanda Knox (and Raffaele Sollecito) in order to save his career or save face. In fact, if he is attempting to make a case against them it is because he believes that they were involved in the brutal murder of Meredith Kercher, that her family deserves to know what happened, and that those responsible must be held accountable.

By the way, Deunan, as someone who is new to the case, you might be interested in the discussion board Perugia Murder File and its predecessors (True Crime and Haloscan), where every aspect of the case has been thoroughly dissected.

Most of your speculations (the rock throwing, etc.) have been considered at length. Your comment about cocaine is interesting. Perugia leads Italy in accidental deaths from cocain overdose per annum. We don’t have access to information about what drugs Rudy or the others may have been under the influence of when they killed Meredith Kercher.

Finally, as for the media circus surrounding this case, one of the reasons this non-profit blog, dedicated to justice for Meredith Kercher, was created was to cut through the fog of biased reporting. The PR firm that was hired by the Knox/Mellas family from the outset is responsible for some of the circus atmosphere, a lot of the biased reporting, and nearly all of the unwarranted focus on Mignini. By all reliable accounts, he is just doing his job and wants closure for Meredith’s family. Two people with access to the media, one in Italy and one in the United States, have taken advantage of the publicity surrounding this case to settle a score with Mignini and promote a book. The world has heard their side of the story; Mignini has remained silent as he awaits his own day in court, where he faces charges of a routine nature according to reliable and neutral sources.

He has been accused of leaking evidence to the press in the case at hand, but I have yet to see proof of this. Leaks have come from many places, and Mignini is known as someone who doesn’t tolerate them. He fired the medical examiner Lalli for leaking information to the media before it was officially made public. I personally was offered a peak at the famous AK diary, and I can tell you that it wasn’t Mignini who made the offer. It is important to remember who is on trial here and who is not. The undue focus on Mignini does not help Meredith Kercher, nor is it intended to. Indeed, it doesn’t even help the defense because it gives the impression that the case against the two other suspects is strong. In other words, it is a diversionary tactic that in my opinion has run its course.

As you say, let the trial begin.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 12/30/08 at 06:53 PM | #

I’m still surprised by the number of people expecting RG to be a star witness in the other trial. As Socrates pointed out above, it’s by far in his interest to sit it out in silence, esp if they’re sticking to the “we weren’t there” story as that means they can’t directly finger him and it gives him more room to maneuver.

In any case his testimony would be valueless if he repeated the kebab defence as to his own part in proceedings. No, expect nothing from Guede until the end of their trial at least

Posted by MikeMCSG on 12/30/08 at 07:09 PM | #

MikeMCSG “As Socrates pointed out above it’s by far in his interest to sit it out in silence…”

Norrmally Mike, yes, but not here.  If Guede wants to see 5-10-15 years off his sentence, he has to be useful right now.

Then that co-operation factors heavily into his appeal.

I commented earlier on this strategy - which, by the way, Guede’s lawyers Biscotti and Gentile actually seem to be following:

Of course the appeal does not freeze things in time and make Guede a non-player until then. This is a bargaining situation.

In part because the prosecutor wants three things: a complete narrative of the crime, a slam-dunk conviction of AK and RS, and words of contrition expressed to the Kerchers.

And in part because Guede can help deliver all three. If Guede keeps silent until the appeal, that power will all dissipate, and he’s going to be dead meat with the crime scene fully recreated. He only has any power up to the point where he testifies (or doesnt testify) at the trial of AK and RS.

The prosecutor seems to be tightening the screws. And we are hearing that Guede is increasing in despair and already starting to send the white-flag signals mentioned in the post.

Weakness? Or a smart survival move? Probably both.  It was Biscotti and Gentile, by the way, that conveyed the news of Guede’s new psychological state to the outside world.

Superb comments by Nicki and Skeptical Bystander above. Their knowledge of the case and the process here is quite awesome, and to me very moving.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/30/08 at 07:19 PM | #

Agh…woke up with crusties. I’ve only been following this case for the past week and have lots of things to catch up on, but one thing I’ve noticed is that evidence/testimonies/news leaks/theories/etc change so much or have such different point of views that its hard to figure out what’s what. And new stuff popping up like this is the first that I had heard that AK was on the rag - not that I believe that furthers any theory. That’s why I’m looking forward for this trial to start…I feel like I just got into it while it is starting to get interesting - and the evidence that has been selectively leaked now has to be shown in its entirety.

Fast Pete:-
- RG - I still don’t see what RG can still bring to the table and how he can cause them to sing like canaries. He’s already fired off his biggest round - “it was them!” What can he possibly add that would be worse? I really believe he is the one who killed her - any other scenarios that he can come up with if they all did it would just be more self incriminating. Also I don’t buy that AK and RS were able to selectively seperate DNA evidence, esp from the body.
- New witnesses/independent experts - no way. New witnesses popping up after a year? Whose testimonies are already changing? (If I remember one of them went from “it was her” to “it was someone wrapped up in warm winter clothes), etc. Are the independent experts you are referring to the talking heads on TV? I didn’t see any reference to them in all the stuff that I was going through…just that there were “independent experts”. Did they see and handle the evidence themselves? Just curious. I’d really like to know esp in the case of the knife and bra strap b/c from what I understood there was so little trace (inconclusive) that they couldn’t do a second test. How could it then be verified?
- Concerning all of these judges - wasn’t it just the latest judge, who said there was enough evidence for it to go forward who really reviewed deeply the evidence to come up with the go ahead to go to trial? The one who said basically I don’t care about the details, just prove your people weren’t there? My understanding is he was the first to really review the information because it was taking so long for the prosecution to gather all of their evidence. There were judges during the RG trial but they were looking at fast track, and just on RG’s culpability. Sure, they ruled that RG was definitely guilty, but they gave zero ruling/input on AK and RS. 
- All the motives - still don’t really buy any of them…or there wouldn’t be so many nutty motives running around.

Socrates42-
- That there were no fingerprints in AK room and that she was menstrual is news to me. As before with this case look into one thing and another jumps up to be researched. But I also don’t believe AK had the mind set to do this, on the rag or not. The home Seattle thing smacked more of taking the blame for everything when there was also a ton of people around… and she wasn’t even that messed up. More like wanting attention and being an idiot in front of the cops.

We’ll have to see on the police evidence concerning the fingerprints…its another one of those weird things that keep popping up or could go either way…either a coverup or a very contaminated scene.

Skeptical Bystander -
Hi there! I think I remember seeing your moniker on several other posts at several other pages.
- I don’t think it was a lone wolf, I think there was someone else there with him, but I doubt it was MK and RS.
- I think it started as burglary but then went really wrong..hence very little taken.
- I’ll wait until the main trial concerning the “damning contradictions” that keep popping up. So I think are correct, some I believe are taken out of context like the “I was there” conversation.
- Looking at the site you mention I recognize it as one of the ones I’ve been landing on when googling. I’ll go in more depth.
- Also concerning Mignini - while I don’t believe he is satan incarnate, I also don’t think he has been impartial and that he has been using sleazy and perhaps illegal tactics to go after the accused. He fits the profile too much of rogue prosecutors in the states…and in addition he has waaay more power than prosecutors in the states. I think that much power corrupts absolutely in his case. 
- Concerning the drugs would they have blood tested them?

Looking forward to seeing what the case is against them,

D

Posted by Deunan on 12/30/08 at 07:29 PM | #

Hi Socrates,

Penetration was confirmed by the medical examiner. Rudy Guede’s biological matter was found on a vaginal swab.

Posted by The Machine on 12/30/08 at 07:37 PM | #

Fast Pete - I follow your reasoning but am not totally convinced.

First Guede has to admit that his original defence was a total lie to save his own skin. That in itself makes him a very dubious witness to employ against anyone else. From what we know of his character acceptance of responsibility for anything seems an alien concept to him. Some vague remarks expressing sympathy for the Kerchers don’t amount to a confession.

Second there’s no hard evidence to support the theory of all three having an EQUAL hand in the murder itself. It could be that “the truth” coming out while convicting AK and RS of something would actually bolster the case for his stiff sentence.

Posted by MikeMCSG on 12/30/08 at 07:52 PM | #

Mike, Mignini would not put on his testimony sight unseen. He would sit with Guede and his lawyers for many hours and possibly for days before (1) accepting it and (2) offering a deal.

He would want the truth and the whole truth and nothing but the truth, if I might coin a phrase!

I seem to be failing to understand what your own scenario is for Guede’s appeal. The guy sounds desperate - and his own lawyers are telling us that. They’re dealing.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/30/08 at 08:02 PM | #

A gentle reminder to new commenter Deunan. This site is about justice for Meredith.

Please don’t saturate the Comments area with the same rather discredited and outdated defense theories that we’ve been revealing as groundless for months now.

And please note there’s been no history of crude words here, as we all presume that the friends and the family of Meredith might come by now and then.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/30/08 at 08:11 PM | #

Deunan,

Again, most of your concerns have been discussed on the boards I mention in ongoing fashion. For example, the tidbit about Amanda Knox menstruating is not news to those who have been following the case.

There was a discussion recently about drug testing on the Perugia Murder File board, so you might want to check that out. In addition, the subject of drugs and who was under the influence of what has also been a subject of ongoing discussion.

I suppose you meant “AK” and not “MK” as an accomplice of RG. Anyway, there are many reasons why people following this case don’t think it is a burglary gone wrong. You can discover the evidence for and against this largely discredited theory on the aforementioned board.

Finally, about Mignini: if you don’t believe he has been impartial then that means the campaign against him launched by identified forces has been successful to some extent. The people who set up this non-profit site, dedicated to justice for Meredith Kercher, do not share your opinion. We and our sources believe that Mignini’s concern is for Meredith’s family and that he has performed his mission impartially and professionally.

If you have some solid, sourced information to the contrary, I suggest you sign up for the Perugia Murder File board and post it there, where it can be discussed and debated.

I think I speak for many here when I say that this site is for Meredith and her family. We don’t want to carry on discussions on this site that might upset them. Although I’m sure you didn’t intend it, your comments about Rudy’s anatomy and Amanda’s menstrual cycle fall into that category. They are fine on a board, but not here. Also, if you are convinced of Amanda’s innocence, you can join the Friends of Amanda or donate air miles to her family.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 12/30/08 at 08:11 PM | #

My apologies,

Did not intend to offend,

D

Posted by Deunan on 12/30/08 at 08:32 PM | #

Apologies accepted. Sign up for the board, where your theories have been and can continue to be discussed. Thanks.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 12/30/08 at 08:34 PM | #

Hi Deunan,

There was only one judge for Rudy Guede’s abbreviated trial, Judge Paolo Micheli. He also looked at the evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

All the judges who have been involved in the case: Judge Claudia Matteini, the judges at the Italian Supreme Court, judge Massimo Riccarelli, and judge Paolo Micheli thought there were serious indications of Amanda Knox’s and Raffaele Sollecito’s guilt and refused to grant them bail on the grounds that they are mentally unstable, dangerous and could reoffend.

I would trust their carefully considered judgements above everyone else’s.

There is no doubt that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito gave multiple alibis and lied repeatedly. Judge Paolo Micheli considered their triple alibis and conflicting statements as proof of their involvement in Meredith’s murder.

Judge Micheli also accepted the forensic evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, and ruled out the possibility of contamination. The forensic evidence is particularly damning.

I would trust the expert judgements of independent forensic scientists like Patricia Stefanoni and Renatio Biondo over the likes of Curt Knox or one of the defence lawyers who have a vested interest in the case and cannot be regarded as impartial.

Several witnesses have testified that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito knew precise details about Meredith’s body. I’m not surprised Amanda Knox refused to answer Mignini when he asked her how she knew specific details about Meredith’s murder.

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have hidden behind their right to silence for over a year. There will be nowhere to hide once the trial starts and the eyes of the world’s media are on them.

Posted by The Machine on 12/30/08 at 08:35 PM | #

Fast Pete - I agree entirely that Mignini would have to be very careful before he used him which is another reason I think it won’t happen. BTW could Mignini offer him a deal ? I didn’t think plea bargains were part of the Italian legal system.

Don’t worry, I don’t understand my scenario for Guede’s appeal either because I don’t have one. I just agree with Socrates that he’d be taking a big risk in intervening now with the possibility that AK and RS would gang up on him as the major (not sole) perpetrator (which may just be the truth). That after all is exactly why he went for a short form trial in the first place.

If pushed I would say his best grounds of appeal is that 30 years is too harsh for an unplanned crime under the influence of drugs.

If you turn out to be right I will virtually buy you a drink 😊

Posted by MikeMCSG on 12/30/08 at 10:27 PM | #

I am disappointed. I thought that the specific goal of this web site was to aid in obtaining justice for Miss Kercher by analysis of her murder. The connotations in some of the comments made today in response to the posts from Deunan, imply that the mission of this website has primarily become to help convict AK and RS.

I am an older gentleman, a scientist by trade, and that makes me incredibly skeptical of everything I read and hear before the evidence is presented at a trial. Although the evidence we have been fed so far indicates that all three of these people were involved (RG, AK, RS) in this shameful crime, I suggest we keep an open mind about the guilt of AK and RS until we hear the evidence presented at trial.  Thank you for allowing me to have posted on this website.

Posted by Greggy on 12/31/08 at 12:15 AM | #

Hi Greggy,

This website will have no bearing on the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. This is not a presidential election and we’re not trying to canvass votes.

None of the comments written in response to Deunan about the evidence are untrue. We should not be afraid of the truth or try to suppress it just because it indicates Amanda Knox’s and Raffaele’s Sollecito’s involvement in Meredith’s murder.

Renato Biondo provided independent confirmation that the forensic investigation was carried out correctly and the findings are accurate and reliable. I take his opinion seriously. We can’t disregard the expert opinions of the forensic scientists involved in the case because we don’t like what they say.

I trust the considered judgements of the numerous judges who have carefully examined the evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. They are abundantly qualified, extremely experienced and independent.

I don’t trust the judgements of people like Anne Bremner who has desperately tried to discredit the forensic investigation. She analysed the wrong crime scene and offered it as proof that the real crime scene had been compromised.

I don’t trust the opinion of Juju Chang who erroneously claimed that the double DNA knife had been essentially ruled out.

There has been a concerted effort to mislead and manipulate the general public. Meredith Kercher is the victim of this terrible murder. Some people have tried to erase her name from the narrative and replace it with the name of the prime suspect. That’s what I find disappointing.

Posted by The Machine on 12/31/08 at 01:11 AM | #

Good guy to have around, is Greggy, and I hope The Machine’s thoughtful response reconciles him. I dont myself see anything new and conclusive above about AK and RS, but perhaps I am missing something.

From the post at the top: “Closure for some victims’ families can be above all a matter of knowing what happened and why, and of hearing some real contrition from the perp or the perps.”

The prosecutor seems to be playing hardball with Guede to this end. It is a good and noble end and could swing the case. More attempts to denigrate Guede and the prosecutor must therefore be expected. We won’t be taking them lying down.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/31/08 at 05:00 AM | #

I share Greggy’s disappointment; I too “thought that the specific goal of this web site was to aid in obtaining justice for Miss Kercher by analysis of her murder. The connotations in some of the comments made today in response to the posts from Deunan, imply that the mission of this website has primarily become to help convict AK and RS.”

I apologise for having posted anything which might have contradicted the aims of this website. As an academic philosopher, I assumed that an open discussion aimed at bringing justice to Meredith & her family by way of discussing diverse opinions which aim at finding the truth, in the spirit on John Stuart Mill’s quote below, was the objective:

“[T]he mental well-being of mankind (on which all their other well-being depends) of freedom of opinion, and freedom of the expression of opinion, on four distinct grounds; which we will now briefly recapitulate.

First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility.

Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any object is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.

Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the dogma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but cumbering the ground, and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction, from reason or personal experience.”
        —John Stuart Mill (1859) ‘On The Liberty of Thought & Discussion

I, therefore, thank the owners & moderators of this website for their patience, and for allowing me to post my comments despite the fact that (out of my own ignorance) I may have posted things which I now realise may not fit with the aims & objectives of this website; and thank you Pete for clarifying what those aims are. I hope that no offence was caused.

Last, but not least, thank you for your informative and excellent articles, and above all, for all of your good-will & efforts. I hope that whoever did this to Meredith is/are convicted accordingly.

Best regards,

Socrates42.

Posted by Socrates42 on 12/31/08 at 01:30 PM | #

[A response to Socrates is now a main post as several emails have suggested]

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/31/08 at 03:31 PM | #

I really admire the memory of Meredith and I appreciate this site very much indeed as do several of my girlfriends, and I for one have no intention of abandoning her cause for the reasons Greggy and Socrates have posted, not very clearly, I must say!

Posted by Anne on 12/31/08 at 04:47 PM | #

Dear Pete,

Thank you for your very long explanation & which I already knew. It is for the reasons you listed above that I chose to come and visit this site regularly & make contributions to articles. I live 20 miles away from Meredith’s home-town and her ordeal has touched us all. We would all like to see justice done to her memory & hear iof her in the most respectable & sympathetic manner which fits her person and the crime that was commited against her.

This is your site, you host it & I have been merely a guest and a visitor. As such, and out of general courtesy, I tried toi always respect the rules and aims of this site & their host. Yesterday’s agressive rebutal of Denuan’s comments as “outdated” etc. made me realise that I may have misunderstood one of the aims of this site (i.e. not to present any view that in the least contradicts the prevailing theory that RS, AK & RG have an equal hand in this). I for one have slowly become conviced - thank to your website and the efforts that the articles involved - that all three were involved. To what degree each one holds the burden of guilt, I’m not sure. I thought that discussions around this were welcomed - I was mistaken. I also thought that newcomers with different views were welcomed so long as their views were corrected through a discussion; this is why I thought that Deunan had the right to express his opinion and we had the right to show him they were false.

However, given that you the host do not agree to this, and given that it is entirely your right to decide on what goes and doesn’t on this site, it is equally the duty of visitors like us to comply with your rules, or if complying with them is not desirable to any of us, then we still have the choice to simply not visit. As visitors we cannot come here & override the rules of the host - it is uncurteous. This what I apologised for in my previous post: I unwittingly may have bypassed some of your site’s rules. I also took the time to thank you all for the excellent good-will and effort which you have showed in the memory of Meredith & which I hope you continue to do.

My objection to Perugia Shock & Candance Dempsey was not the fact that voiced opinions that contradicted mine; my objection was their hardline views which allowed for no one to speak other than those who side with them. It is exactly this that the John Stuart Mills quote was aimed to show: be careful that the finger you point at them doesn’t come back pointing back at you. I understand that it is frustrating how people can bypass facts & continue their support for AK & RS - I share your sentiment & the views expressed about them on this site, as I’m sure you have wittnessed from my comments. I will continue, however, to show more patience with those people so long as they are being polite. For it is no crime to be mistaken; it is a crime to be arrogant when corrected.

Given that this is your site & you have clearly articulated your dislike for people opposing your views, I am left with no choice as a vistor but to accept your wishes, or if I find them too severe to comply with, than I can choose not to visit. I will chose the latter.

Posted by Socrates42 on 12/31/08 at 05:48 PM | #

“you have clearly articulated your dislike for people opposing your view”

Oh?! Where, precisely, Socrates? I find that remark pretty weird. I left Deunan’s remarks standing, although a lot of people were bothered by the language and wanted them down.

And I merely (upon receipt of a lot of emails) posted a gentle reminder, which Deunan seemed to accept without getting tied up in knots.

And what rules are you talking about? There are no rules here, except to respect the existing body of work by many people on this site, and use that as a point of departure.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/31/08 at 06:06 PM | #

Lets move on. I was interested in the perspective in Fast Pete’s post on Mignini and would like to know more about him.

Posted by Jackson on 12/31/08 at 06:17 PM | #

Socrates, I cant believe I am reading you right! You are falling on your sword for a troll? Are you new to the internet? You really dont recognize a troll when you see one?

Posted by Anne on 12/31/08 at 11:02 PM | #

Anne made me laugh with her perception. Yeah, we got unequivocal confirmation today. We know who it was, too.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/01/09 at 02:20 AM | #

Make a comment

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Meredith Would Have Been 23 Today

Or to previous entry Where The Convicted Perp And The Defendants Are Now