Day 6
Day 6, 26 November 2013
Get away, you beast, for this man
does not come tutored by your sister;
he comes to view your punishments.
Inferno, Canto XII, lines 18–20 Dante
If the Minotaur is the monstrous beast in the dark heart of the Labyrinth, then Crini could perhaps be Theseus sent to confront and slay it.
The court reconvenes. Sollecito is absent today, Patrick Lumumba will be here.
Today Crini will finish his submission. He begins with housekeeping technicalities.
- Crini heavily criticises Conti & Vecchiotti in their methodology and failing to give any credit to the prosecution forensic experts, Professors Novelli and Torrecelli, one of the reasons the appeal was sent back down by the Chieffi Supreme Court.
- He defends Dr. Stefanoni against criticisms of procedural flaws.
- He refers to Vecchiotti’s brushes with authorities over her professional methods.
- He mentions the fridges in her own laboratories do not even have a thermometer.
There is a lot to go through and to sum up, the main difference between Crini’s submissions and Massei’s findings are:
- It was not a ‘sex game gone wrong’ but a simple domestic dispute that escalated
- Massei gave the initator of the aggression as Guede. Crini says it could have been Meredith who was the trigger, annoyed by the unwelcome guests when she was tired and wanted an early night.
- Whilst he gives no credence to Guede’s testimonies, he considers Guede’s claim Amanda and Meredith had a fight when Meredith confronted her about her missing rent money.
CRINI: So then … and then for a problem of money. He apparently from the thief puts the money problem on the fact that Knox had stolen them from Meredith. There is no emergency in this matter, though there were some money Meredith had already prepared for, because he had to pay for the rent, and in short, as a little girl, it seemed to be diligent, had already been taken into account … he had already put money for the day 05. So … and when she declares this to the Mezzetti, Knox is present. … But the problem remains that a problem of money actually, , it is related to the fact that the cleanliness had an implication, because it was problematic to manage the cleaning in the apartment
- Massei allowed the defence argument that Sollecito’s call to the police was before the Postale Police arrived, Crini resets the time to ‘after’ they arrive.
- Massei fixed the time of death as 23:00 or thereabouts. Crini favours an earlier time of 22:30, after the last phone signal on Meredith’s phone.
- He says the identification of the sample 36-I as Knox is incriminating to Knox as it is just below the hilt.
CRINI: in addition to the genetic profile, “a good profile”, this was also the word used by Professor Vecchiotti, “A good profile” by Knox Amanda at a point on the handle most projected on the side of the blade, it is also interesting to note that there is another profile, more complex to read, but the experts have wonderfully identified, which is the the profile of the same Knox Amanda, at the point of junction between the blade and the handle.
[Later] But let’s say that at the point where DNA is found, there in that particular position, certainly is a point that is much more significant at the level of improper use than the DNA found on the handle, because that is not a point of normal contact, is a point where DNA is hiding, so to speak, as well as Meredith’s DNA hidden in the striata, it’s a place to hide after obviously there was a wash. And which DNA can be hiding there after washing? You have understood what I mean. That’s why I say that this element, of the knife compared to the Knox, is a significant analysis, because there Knox has a close relationship with this knife, very strong.
… a serious wash, but it leaves more DNA in the part that holds it and less DNA in the least part of it. Indeed, the blade was destined to have no trace of it, if the DNA did not get embedded at the point where it was concealed, in that striata of the blade, fortunately for us and unfortunately for the defendants.
- The knife is outlined perfectly by a blood stain on the sheet and fits the large neck wound.
- The bruises and marks around Meredith’s lower face indicates an attempt to cover her mouth to stop her screaming.
CRINI But this scenario is conterminous with the presence of other traumas inside the mouth, which is a strong constraint because there are internal lacerations at Meredith’s mouth – understand? – and these lacerations are not part of things that are derived from a knife. No. It is purely and simply the very intent to keep this girl’s mouth shut, to stab her in the neck and to stop her from obviously doing what…? What she did, was to explode in a formidable scream.
- Crini believes it is not important to explain why the knife was brought from Sollecito’s abode to the cottage.
Both parties turned off their phones for the night, before 21:00, and Knox was pinged as being in the vicinity the cottage, so transporting it there in her bag, as Massei suggested does conjure up a suspicion of a sinister quest that night. Against the backdrop of the totally inane and harmless movie ‘Amélie’ which was to be their alibi, it takes on the surreal undertones of a horror movie. A children’s musical box tinkling way in the soundtrack, with something evil happening in the foreground in front of a blinking doll and a laughing clown ragdoll…
CRINI: let’s say we do a photography of the story because the photograph of the affair certainly does not belong to a process in which those who are supposed to be present, starting with Guede, tells of different things, in the sense two do not say anything about, except that one – as we have seen – explains in short having dreamlike memories of this story, this is one.
So we have a silent defendant, who says he was in his house smoking a spliffs in front of the computer; another who says she has dream memories and accuses a person of which he is well aware is innocent; and then the third one who tells the things you know, that is, to say “I came home” … etc.
- As the charge is ‘aggravated murder’ (= US ‘First Degree) because of the sexual assault element, there was no onus for the prosecution to prove premeditation.
To my mind the sexual assault and sexual posing of the body does indicate a sexual motive on some level. However, Crini believes it sufficient to keep the matter simple and the motive a simple heated row over hygiene, housekeeping, money and manners.
- He affirms Meredith was fully sober and awake. Knox, Guede and Sollecito were high on drugs.
- He believes Guede restrained Meredith with both hands. Crini believes Guede was intent on sexually assaulting her, whilst the other two tormented her with knives. There were almost no defence wounds, aside from three small nicks on her fingers, when normally in a knife crime, injuries to the hand can be severe from the victim grabbing the blade.
- He details how her body was moved away from its original position, with just a t-shirt and vest pulled up over her breasts, her jeans and blue sweater removed and her legs splayed.
Interestingly, both Knox and Sollecito mention in separate statements Meredith wearing her ex-boyfriend’s jeans earlier that afternoon. We see that the jeans were at the forefront of the pair’s minds immediately after the murder.
- He avers that Meredith’s bra was cut multiple times by a very sharp small knife and this is how Sollecito’s DNA became deposited there.
CRINI let’s say, if one wants to cut it right, a few inches away, making a sharp cut, it’s where it is held, so it’s significant that there is that DNA, because it is exactly where the hook is to be held. And there’s this Kercher-Solicited DNA in reconstruction, that’s not Rudy Guede’s DNA at that point, that is Kercher-Sollecito’s Mixed DNA.
…[…]… in the words of Amanda Knox, who speaking not in general, but speaking with reference to a question, [from her father], said, ” Raffaele always carries a knife with him, Knox tells him, so it’s a matter of fact that Knox knew this at the house.
- Crini reintroduces the ladies size 37 clear footprint found on the pillow in the victim’s blood as evidence of Knox’ involvement.
CRINI …the famous pillowcase – famous because this piece of sliver, let’s say, became the element from which the identification of Guede was made – on the famous pillowcase that contains the handprint and even the footprint of a shoe, the right, if not the wrong, of the Guede, – a pillow that is right in the middle of the crime, is like the centre of gravity of the crime scene.. The Bureau of Police Science, the Central Office of the Scientific Police, tells us the presence of a shoe and gives us this indication of a foot shoe, feminine, like that ‘Exalted by Luminol yesterday.
And this… “For such considerations the size of the shoe that produced the footprint could be varied from the number 36 to the number 38”. It seems to me the same numbers of the imprints found with Luminol in those other areas of the house. Here, then there was a female foot that had – so to speak – pounded, which was imprinted, a female shoe that was imprinted on this pillowcase.
- He focuses on how Amanda’s blood is on the bathroom tap, yet her claim not to remember bleeding is unconvincing.
- Mignini in the Massei trial believed the mixed DNA of Amanda and Meredith in the small bathroom was the most incriminating of all as it appeared they were both bleeding at the same time, for it to comingle.
CRINI: “Yes, I saw blood but I did not connect it with myself. ” But how not, dear, it, is your drip! How do you “do you not connect it with me”? Explain why a drop of blood has fallen into the sink, right? It’s not what you say, “I saw blood, I did not connect it with myself.” No, you’re talking about your blood, not the blood of Meredith or Romanelli. Your blood, because it turns out to be yours. So if you’ve got a spill, it’s best to say.
I see the girl in possession of this knife, and a situation that maybe at the moment does not offer specific indications of injuries that she has suffered; the fact remains that Amanda Knox’s blood is in this bidet, mixed with that of Meredith, and one present alone, to a sufficiently large extent, to which is not given … the slightest explanation.
In the sense, she rightly evades the subject and says “well, I see blood but it does not make an impression”. But how? It’s your own. Is absurd. However, she says “it’s okay” … so.
…[…]… The context is that we are here with a bloody, cruel, killing-killing person, in which anything can happen I have to give this blood to Knox, who runs this into this bidet, some explanation, otherwise I cannot imagine it closely related to the bloody story that was consumed little by little. I can be happy to say “well, it’s Knox’s blood, but in short, let’s say it will come from a cut “? Maybe. The fact is that this element, too, is also corroborating, and that is precisely what we say is integrating; it indicates a clear presence at the scene of the offender but not as a resident , but as a cover.
- The calunnia of Patrick was part of Knox’ calculated strategy to subvert the investigation, together with the staging of the body and undressing it after the murder, set out yesterday, and he will make a submission on this.
- Crini winds by demanding the maximum sentence of 30 years for Knox, and increase of one year to four years for ‘aggravated calunnia’ rather than simple calunnia in that her motive was as an extension to the murder.
CRINI: So, excluding the futile reason, I ask you to assert the criminal liability of both defendants, condemning each one to the sentence of twenty-six years of imprisonment. Thank you for your attention and I have finished. excluding the futile motive, I ask you to assert the criminal liability of both defendants, condemning each one to the penalty of twenty-six years of imprisonment.
Crini’s testimony concludes at 14:15
It is a powerful submission which sends shock waves throughout the court and is sensational fodder for tomorrow’s papers, such as the New York Daily Times
A bird’s eye court circular can be seen on TJMK.
Back at 3:15, and so begins the conclusions of the civil parties.
First up is Pacelli for Lumumba. He gives a colourful account of Knox’ sex life, bathroom habits, and clashes as described in the testimony of Meredith’s British friends. For example, he quotes Sophie Purton:
PACELLI: “Meredith told us that Amanda had men at home, and that was something we did not do. Amanda was pretty open about her sex life, and left a beauty in the bathroom, with a vibrator and condoms. “
And so on, in that vein, including a long character assassination of Sollecito and his drug-taking habits. He leads up to his memorable speech, oft quoted in the tabloids:
PACELLI So, Mr President and Members of the Court, who is Amanda Knox? It’s that sweet, sweet, water-soaked face that you see in TV talk shows today, her most intimate English friends, Italian coinquilines, Italian roommates, your school friend, who describe you as lazy and drug-addicted and alcoholic?
So, as I repeat, it is from court proceedings. I tell you, Amanda is one and the other. In her she lives a double soul: the angelic, good, compassionate, I have already had on other occasions to define the Santa Maria Goretti, tender, naive; and that luciferin, demonic, satanic, diabolical, which leads her to live extremist, borderline conduct and adopt disordered behaviors.
And Amanda was the one on November 1, 2007. Amanda was a concentrate, an explosive mixture of sex, drugs and alcohol, at the time of the crime, not unmodified by a marked lack of hygiene. And it must be said in clear letters, Ladies of the Court: Amanda was a muddy girl outside because she was black inside.
He is, of course here, on behalf of Patrick Lumumba. Pacelli articulates the outrage and fear felt by Patrick in being wrongly accused of rape and murder by Knox and imprisoned for two weeks.
PACELLI: But if no one knew it, neither the English girlfriends, the roommates nor the roommates downstairs, nor the same police, how could Amanda know that poor Meredith had sex just before she was killed, if not because Amanda was in the house of Via della Pergola on the crime scene at the time of the crime?
He refutes that Knox was under pressure by the police.
PACELLI: And I would like to conclude on this point with the testimony of Dr. Profazio, manager at the estimated time of the Mobile Team in Perugia: “Do you remember how Amanda was treated by the staff”? “Amanda was treated well.” “There have been acts of violence”? “Absolutely not. Amanda was given to drink several times, was brought hot chamomile, brought to the cafeteria bar to have breakfast and were given some brioches. It’s been treated well. ” “It was handled well” – he adds shortly afterwards – “obviously firmly, because we were not, in short, at the cinema or the circus, even though someone could think so, no firmly but with courtesy.”
He, too, fixes the scream as a key moment.
PACELLI: Therefore, the fact that Meredith before being assassinated shouted, shouted, is historically true and processively proven and demonstrated. And Amanda is so clever and clever that in the spontaneous statements at 5:45 am, she immediately notes, literally: “And I’m frightened, I plugged my ears.”
This is an embellishment, a posting of a diabolical subtlety, because it makes a fact, in itself credible, certain. Turns the certainty into certainty. But the question I pose for the purposes I have set is as follows: But how could Amanda know that poor Meredith had yelled, if this was not yet public domain?
Then there was the issue of the frightening time Patrick spent in jail, suspected of a terrible crime. Police intercepted conversations of Knox’ prison visit with her mother.
PACELLI: So let’s see what happens in the next few days, when Amanda in her jails interview with her mother, speaking in English, in the belief that she is not heard, feels the irrepressible need to shake the weight of lies and the intolerable burden of her sobbing consumed, and under the feeling of iniquity committed against Patrick hastens, yes, she hastens to tell the truth to her mother.
In the environmental interception of November 10, 2007, between Amanda and her mother, November 10, Edda Mellas, on page 4, is the following interview: “Have you told everything about your lawyers?” Amanda: “I told him everything that happened.”
Always in this environmental interception in jail between Amanda and her mother, on November 10, 2007, Amanda states: “I feel bad because I put Patrick in a horrible situation, now he is in jail and it’s my fault, it’s my fault that he is here, I feel bad,” p 29
and adds,” I feel bad for Patrick, I do not know if I can look at him later this after all because I have to apologize. Here’s what I have to do. I have to go to him and tell him “I’m really sorry” “, page 33.
Environmental interception in jail between Amanda and her mother, November 13, 2007:” I’m so sorry for Patrick, I’m so sorry I ruined his life. I want to kneel every time I see him and tell him that I’m so sorry. I talked to him before he was arrested, he came to ask me if I wanted to be interviewed. I said no. And then he said, “Okay, good luck.” And I: “Thanks.” He’s a good guy. He does not frighten me. ” Amanda Review, June 12, 2009
After winding up, it is the turn of Magnini for Mrs Tattanelli, the cottage owner.
MAGNINI: This little cottage, which is no longer a small house, has now become Perugia’s “villa of horrors,” “the home of the crime,” and at best “the house of Meredith”
Mrs Tattanelli is a widow, aged 90, who had acquired the cottage to rent out as a retirement supplement.
MAGNINI: On November 2, the house was seized and was seized for a year and a half. But lucky circumstances also allowed a quick breakdown, because they had entered … intrusions, curious, fanatics, and had altered the scene of the crime. The damage to the lady is the lack of perception of rentals for this year and a half, all the damage that was created inside the house, broken doors, broken glass, stains, and reagents; the need to put the grates on the windows because then curious and fetishists came to the house, wanted to enter the house of Meredith, and above all the damage that almost confounded like a permanent damage, because the house, as I said in the opening , is “the villa of horrors”, is “the house of the crime”.
It was no longer possible to rent it to students, students recognize it all, the story has had a global eco-media, the home is a home that is now part of the imaginary of macabre sites, crime sites, and hence it is a good thing that has completely lost its economic worth.
The proceedings come to a close for the day and Nencini defers the next hearing to hear the rest of the Civil Lawyers to the 16 Dec 2013, as requested by Luciano Ghirga for Knox, and Bongiorno for Sollecito cannot make it for the 17 due to other commitments.
Knox defence will appear on the 16th December.
KrissyG's Eyes 
Leave a Reply