Category: Amanda Knox

Friday, June 26, 2009

Trial: The Defenses Continue To Pursue The “Rudy Did It Alone” Angle

Posted by Peter Quennell

Testimony From Perugia Lawyers About A Breakin

Only the Italian media are reporting today’s happenings so far.

Click above for the first AGI report in Italian. Here is a quick translation.

The proceedings in the court began today with the testimony of two lawyers from Perugia, who stood firm in their claim that Rudy Guede stole a laptop and a mobile phone from their offices which were later seized by the police.

The two professionals explained that the theft happened overnight between 13 and 14 October 2007 when an unknown person entered the law firm premises after having broken a glass window with a rock.

The lawyer Paul Brocchi described the entrance window, located about three to four meters above the ground, as “not easy to enter” and he said that the alarm usually switched on in the evenings was not activated.

On that occasion, among other things stolen were a laptop computer and a mobile phone seized by police on October 27 when Rudy Guede was caught sleeping in a nursery school in Milan.

Mr Brocchi also testified that on 29 October 2007, hew saw a “boy of color” later recognized as Guede from the newspapers presenting himself on the news as being a stranger to these facts, and stating that he had purchased the computer on a regular basis at the train station in Milan.

Friday, June 19, 2009

Trial: Defendant’s Mother Recounts Her Version Of Phonecalls The Day After

Posted by Peter Quennell

[courtesy AP, click for larger image]

Click for the report by La Nazione in Italian. A quick translation:

Edda Mellas said three phone calls were made to her by Amanda on the morning of November 2 Perugia time when Meredith’s body was discovered without life in the house on via della Pergola.

“The first call arrived at 4 am, I do not know that time in Italy. Amanda told me that she had a suspicion that someone could be in the house because the door was open. It was just a suspicion as the main door had a troublesome lock and sometimes it did not not close. “

Mrs. Mellas recalled that Amanda had said in the first call that she found unusual things while taking a shower,

“There was blood in the bathroom, and I thought it could be from the cycle of one of the girls who then did not clean up well, but I suspect more it could have come from the edge of the bath,”

Amanda then said she had come from Raffaele’s where she had spent the whole night.

“The second call came an hour I think after the first. Amanda was completely desperate because in the room of Meredith, the inspectors had found her body.”

Shortly after, Amanda again called her mother in Seattle.

“A few minutes later she called again. She was crying that they had found her body in the room of Meredith. She was completely distraught.”

On a recent post here on TJMK Finn McCool tried hard to make sense of the timing and content of those calls to Seattle. 

Today, the description and timing of those calls still seems to remain a problem. 

On the Perugia Murder File Forum Michael is pointing out that Mrs Mellas might have dropped her daughter in the soup.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

The Letters Between The Women’s And Men’s Wings In Capanne

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for Nick Pisa’s report on Knox’s letters to RS on Sky News.

Still, there is conjecture now that Sollecito may (again) just have to cut loose and go his own way on a defense.

It is hard to see how Friday and Saturday really helped him. His people read the same media we do.

Amanda Knox has opened her heart in a series of letters to her co-accused and former boyfriend about prison life and their ongoing murder trial.

The American student, 21, is accused of the brutal sex murder of her British housemate Meredith Kercher, also 21.

In one of the letters to Raffaele Sollecito, 25, she writes a poem in Italian to him called Ho Una Sola Vita (I Have Only One Life).

On February 13, 2009, Knox wrote: “It was good to see you again today.

“We got to exchange a few more glances than usual, though I have to admit, I’m not good at reading the subtle messages that one passes through the features of the face, nor can I read lips.

“I know what kind of girl am I?!? Those things are supposed to be my first (underlined) language.

“So, long story short, I must admit that I didn’t pick up exactly word for word what you may have wanted to transmit my way.”

In another letter to Sollecito, a day later on February 14, Knox also writes about life in her cell at Perugia’s Capanne jail:

She asked him: “Are you alone in your cell?

“The thing about women’s prison is there about 70 of us altogether at the maximum and we all live on the same floor, so all of us are mixed together regardless of the length or type of conviction.

“For instance in my very own cell I’m living with a drug addict, a thief and an accomplice to murder… if I have to get down to their crimes they are here for.”

In another letter to Sollecito on February 18 she writes of their relationship and says: “I try not to think about “what ifs” at all but these aren’t sad at all for me to think about.

“We could have really had something special, it’s true.

“Although we still had (and still have) much to learn about each other, we clicked, we made each other happy, we were open to each other.

“We still have an opportunity to click. I’m still here for you.

“I know it doesn’t seem like enough because you want where we were headed before the whole world suddenly threw us into an experience we don’t deserve and we were cut off from each other.”

She added: “This whole experience is frustrating and I understand how you feel like I know you understand me.”

Knox closed the letter by writing: “You know what would be wonderful?

“Do you think they would let us hug each other when the judge absolves us? I’m tired of not being allowed to look at you.

“I hope this letter doesn’t hurt you because all of your letters give me a sense of peace. Thank you, I’m here to hold your hand.

“Your friend Amanda. Let it Be! Here Comes the Sun.”

Saturday, June 13, 2009

Knox Testimony Does Not Seem To Have Gained Much Traction Here In Italy

Posted by Fiori

Posting from Florence (image below) where we have all been watching Knox testify in Italian.

I don’t believe her. It is interesting to see Amanda Knox being cool and self-confident, but testifying about how disturbed she became when the police became pushy during her interrogation. It doesn’t fit.

And it comes across as untrustworthy and contradictory that when asked about her drug use, she puts on a “schoolgirl”’ attitude: In effect “Sorry, daddy judge, I was bad, don’t punish me for being young”.  This seems definitely out of order with the rest of her performance.

“Performance” is the impression I get from viewing the segments shown from the court - a well-rehearsed performance. I suppose that the jury will wonder how this cool person can forget whether she has replied to a sms-message, how she can get so confused that she names Patrick, afterwards “is too afraid to speak to anyone but her mother”, and so on.

Most striking is that Amana Knox’s defence seems to stick firmly to the strategy of “mistreatment”; in effect that the only reason for AK being arrested is false statements produced under “illegal” pressure from the police.

By making “the ethics of police interrogation” the core question of her testimony, the defence - probably deliberately - creates a lot of associations to recent public debates of torture and interrogation techniques applied at Guantanamo Bay and in Iraq.

By doing so they seem to want to try to turn the jury’s attention away from the point that AK knowingly participated in a murder investigation, and that any person with her intelligence will know that anyone who is called as a witness is required to show respect for the authorities - regardless of their nationality!

With reference to a variety of public materials from the US (“48 Hours” by CBS and many other reports), the way in which the Italian police have conducted Knox’s interview does not significantly differ from similar type interrogations made by US police. (This is not a stamp of approval, but removes the reason for any serious critique of the conduct of the Italian police.)

Her calmness and cool attitude, including her performing in two languages, does not, in my view - contrary to what the defence and her father expect - help to bring about an image of “another Amanda Knox” or a “more true Amanda Knox”.

Mostly her performance seems to contribute to shaping her image as complex, manipulative, intelligent, attention-seeking, and with only vaguely defined limits of identity.

Trail: Newsweek Reports On Friday’s Testimony By The Defendant

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for Barbie Nadeau’s Friday report from Perugia.

Trial: Associated Press Reporting Testy Exchanges In Court

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for the report.

In a testy exchange, Mignini questioned Knox’s assertion that interrogators had extracted false statements from her by bullying her, calling her a “stupid liar” and even hitting her on the head at one point.

Knox gave a description of hours of questioning in which she said that she was told that if she did not tell the truth they would “throw me in jail for 30 years.”

Defence lawyers repeatedly objected during Mignini’s examination, accusing him of badgering the witness and asking her leading questions.

Mignini focused on Knox’s assertions that her false statements—notably, that her part-time employer Patrick Lumumba was the killer—were the result of “suggestions” during aggressive police questioning.

“Was Patrick’s name indicated after they saw (her SMS) message (to Lumumba) or just like that?” Mignini asked, sparking a heated row with the defence team that judge Giancarlo Massei had difficulty quelling.

Knox said she became so confused after “a steady crescendo ... of ‘I don’t know,’ ‘you’re a stupid liar,’ ‘maybes,’ and ‘imagines’ that ... I was led to believe I had forgotten things.”

She added: “When I said ‘Patrick’ I actually started to imagine a kind of movie, images that could have explained the situation, Patrick’s face, then (Perugia’s) Grimana square, then my house” on the night of the murder.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Trial: Sky News Italy Video Of The Defendant’s Opening Statement Today

Posted by Peter Quennell

This is the court CCTV camera feed to the press-room, which is legitimate for the reporters there to capture.

Trial: Andrea Vogt Reports Knox’s Recounting Of The Night

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for Andrea Vogt’s story on the Seattle PI website.

She described how the two spent the night of Kercher’s death at Sollecito’s house, checking her e-mail, reading Harry Potter in German, smoking pot, watching “Amelie” and making love, before going to sleep.

Forensic experts have testified that Kercher’s blood mixed with Knox’s blood were found in the bathroom and back bedroom of the apartment they shared.

Knox herself said she arrived at her apartment the next morning to see the door wide open and drops of blood, which she thought “strange,” but assumed one of her roommates had left in a hurry or was having menstrual issues. She took out her earrings (she had recently had multiple piercings and one was infected) on the sink, then took a shower, scooting from the bathroom to her bedroom on the bathmat, which she also noticed was stained with blood.

Prosecutors have argued that the footprint on the bathmat made in Kercher’s blood, is compatible with Sollecito’s footprint. Knox and Kercher’s DNA was also found on a kitchen knife believed to be the alleged murder weapon.

Concerned by feces left in the second bathroom’s toilet, she went to fetch Sollecito. When roommates, friends and the police arrived and knocked down Kercher’s door, she heard her roommate cry out “a foot, a foot!”

The group of friends all got into a car to warm up and talked about what police were saying might have happened. Upset and in shock, she cried then, she said, as Sollecito held and consoled her.

Trial: Knox Claimed Not To Have Been At The House On The Night

Posted by Peter Quennell

[click for larger image]

New York’s Daily News from various wire services.

Knox said she last saw Kercher on the afternoon of Nov. 1. Knox testified the two talked about what they had done the night before “” a Halloween night out “” and Knox said Kercher still had a bit of her vampire makeup on, the AP reports.

Knox went on to say Sollecito then arrived at the house; he and Knox had something to eat while Kercher remained in her room.

“She left her room, said ‘bye,’ walked out the door,” Knox said, who switched from speaking English to Italian. “That was the last time I saw her.”

Her testimony on the stand was markedly different than the statement she gave police days after her roommate was found dead.

Originally Knox claimed to have been at the house she shared with Kercher on the night of the murder. She later retracted that story and said she was not there.

Sollecito flip-flopped on his story as well. He had told police he was at his apartment watching a movie with Knox and she spent the night with him. Later, he claimed to not remember if she had spent the night.

Defendant Testifies: Is This A Prosecutor’s Dream Come True?

Posted by Arnold_Layne

[click for larger image]

To my knowledge, in the past when Amanda has spoken on her own behalf she was not challenged by the prosecution.  Friday will be different.  On Friday, she will be asked to reconcile discrepancies in her statements.  She will not be a sworn-in witness so it is not clear which lines of questioning will be allowed but the prosecutor will certainly try to impeach her.  If she is a psychopath, things could get knarly.

You’ve all seen it many times on crime shows.  On cross examination, the witness offers some testimony, for example, the fact that she has never been married.  The lawyer then asks to offer into evidence a marriage certificate.  Reducing the credibility of a witness in this fashion is known as impeaching the witness.  There are special rules that apply which allow the attorney to ask questions not normally allowed.  To discredit a claim made by the witness, the prosecutor could, for example, enter new evidence not presented previously during the prosecution phase of the trial.  The jury is then instructed to use the evidence only as it reduces the credibility of the witness but to ignore it when otherwise considering the guilt or innocence.  That’s expecting a lot.

One characteristic of a psychopath is the ability to lie with facility.  This does not mean the ability to spin a yarn or to make up a good story.  Most of us can do this.  It also doesn’t mean that the lie is particularly bad (a boldface lie).  When asked a question when the truth is not going to yield a desirable outcome, most of us will pause a little, maybe lift our eyes upward, as we weigh the consequences of the lie.  Someone who can lie with facility speaks the lie as fast as they would the truth and with the same conviction.

The problem, of course, is that without the pause there is no weighing of the implications of the lie.  There is little checking for consistency.  In social situations this can easily be maneuvered around by saying something along the lines of, “Aw, I was just jokin’”.  Guede adjusted his story to meet the facts as they emerged.  Amanda now also knows the evidence against her and she’s had plenty of time to create a story to match it.  She will be on stable ground here as the Judge and jury weigh her statements against those put forth by the prosecution.  This is a good reason to only have one of the two defendants testify.  They can’t trip each other up.

Cross, on the other hand, is going to be a minefield for her.  Not only will the prosecution point out discrepancies but they will challenge her on them and she will be under pressure to correct them.  She will be up against a trial lawyer’s strong suit.  Mignini will be trying to impeach her.  If she steps on one of his mines, she will probably step on many ““ and he’ll be laying even more as she speaks.

Other incendiaries include her basking in the attention and notoriety she is getting.  Additionally, she is a creative writer.  Who can say what this might lead her to say if she strays from the straight and narrow.

I give her credit for doing this but I certainly don’t envy her.  I can’t say that I have ever done anything tougher myself.  I wouldn’t eat for two days, just as a precautionary measure. Btw “can you smoke on the witness stand?” I’d bring a carton, of Luckies.