Lies lies lies by Amanda Knox and Raffaelle Sollecito – and some salient points about the case

17 Oct

At the end of  a story entitled “Let’s Not Forget Amanda Knox’s Lie’ at http://www.theroot.com/views/lets-not-forget-amanda-knoxs-lie?page=0,1  there are a number of reader comments. Here are two that are salient to the case as a whole, not just the lie about Diya Lumumba, written on October 16th 2011.

‘harryrag’ wrote…Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito gave completely different accounts of where they were, who they were with and what they were doing on the night of the murder. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis despite three attempts each.

The DNA didn’t miraculously deposit itself in the most incriminating of places.

An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. His DNA was identified by two separate DNA tests. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito’s profile matched 17 out of 17.

Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on the handle of the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade. Sollecito knew that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade which is why he twice lied about accidentally pricking her hand whilst cooking.

According to the prosecution’s experts, there were five instances of Knox’s DNA or blood mixed with Meredith’s blood in three different locations in the cottage. Even Amanda Knox’s lawyers conceded that her blood had mingled with Meredith’s blood.

Knox tracked Meredith’s blood into the bathroom, the hallway, her room and Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged. Knox’s DNA and Meredith’s blood was found mixed together in Filomena’s room, in a bare bloody footprint in the hallway and in three places in the bathroom.

Rudy Guede’s bloody footprints led straight out of Meredith’s room and out of the house. This means that he didn’t stage the break-in in Filomena’s room or go into the blood-spattered bathroom after Meredith had been stabbed.

The bloody footprint on the blue bathmat in the bathroom matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot, but couldn’t possibly belong to Guede. Knox’s and Sollecito’s bare bloody footprints were revealed by luminol in the hallway.

It’s not a coincidence that the three people – Knox, Sollecito and Guede – who kept telling the police a pack of lies are all implicated by the DNA and forensic evidence.

Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith’s murder, in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. After she was informed that Sollecito was no longer providing her with an alibi, she stated on at least four separate occasions that she was at the cottage when Meredith was killed. At the trial, Sollecito refused to corroborate Knox’s alibi that she was at his apartment.

Knox accused an innocent man, Diya Lumumba, of murdering Meredith despite the fact she knew he was completely innocent. She didn’t recant her false and malicious allegation against Lumumba the whole time he was in prison. She admitted that it was her fault that Lumumba was in prison in an intercepted conversation with her mother on 10 November 2007.

End of comment by “Harry Rag”.

Maurice wrote…
Everyone goes on about what happened between the police and Knox… illegal interrogation, slaps, food deprivation, lack of legal representation etc. Sollecito has never made any allegations against the police. [NB - treat some of those allegations about Knox and the police with caution - Ed of this blog]

I want you to look at what led up to her interview.

When he was first interviewed by the police Sollecito told police that he and Knox had been at a party and then spent the night at his flat with Amanda. This is also the alibi he provides to the Sunday Mirror 24 hours after the murder.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sunday-mirror/2007/11/04/italy-murder-details-emerge-98487-20058122/

One wonders who the ‘friend’ was meant to be. (one could speculate Guede)
When he could not substantiate that they had attended a party. It appears from later documents that Sollecito explained to the police that he did not think it important that he needed to get his alibi ‘right’. The police seem to have accepted his explanation and asked him to give a truthful account of his activities on the fateful night. Sollecito now claimed that he was at his apartment throughout the night with Amanda Knox and gave details of what they were doing. Phone calls, computer, what time they went to bed, what time they woke up etc.

Sollecito was asked to return to the police station on 5 November to answer some more questions. Obviously, they were both very much aware that they were going to be interviewed about alibis before they attended the police station. Sollecito was confronted with telephone records that proved that he and Amanda Knox had lied previously. The police would go on to find that computer records did not match up also.

Game up. Sollecito implicated Knox. He said he had told Amanda things would not match up. Sollecito claimed that he was at his apartment all evening, and that for part of the evening, Knox was out, 9am to 1pm. Sollecito never made another statement regarding his alibi for the rest of the case, as far as I am aware.

That was when Knox began to get ‘interrogated’.

If the police were tough with her………. don’t blame them! A brutal, horrific murder of a young beautiful student had occurred on their patch.

End of comment by Maurice.

This blog,  ‘A Death in Perugia’,  is written/produced by a professional journalist who is also a media expert, and who feels the appeals court judgement was a miscarriage of justice. No money will be earned from this blog.

About these ads

2 Responses to “Lies lies lies by Amanda Knox and Raffaelle Sollecito – and some salient points about the case”

  1. Jeff November 9, 2011 at 6:19 pm #

    REFUTATION OF CLAIM THAT RAFFAELE CHANGED HIS STORY

    Raffaele’s statment to the police has never been made public, and it was not referenced in the Massei report, so you have no basis for saying that Sollecito told police that he and Knox had been at a party the night of the murder.

    The information in the Mirror story was unattributed. It simply states that Raffaele said it without specifying to whom. In fact, they NEVER interviewed Raffaele.

    The story, by relying on second or third hand information, transmits to the public the mistake that many have made in regard to this case, of thinking that the murder occured on Halloween, or, as in the case of many older Italians, including Antonio Curatolo, of confusing Halloween with the Day of the Dead.

    The simple fact is this:

    Raffaele and Amanda went to a party on Halloween, the day BEFORE the murder. Some people either assumed that the murder occurred on Halloween, or confused Halloween with the Day of the Dead, and so mis-reported it as Raffaele saying they went to a party on November 1.

    • Matthew Last March 27, 2014 at 1:12 am #

      In an interview with Kate Mansey of the Sunday Times on 4th November 2007, Sollecito said:

      “It was a normal night. Meredith had gone out with one of her English friends and Amanda and I went to party with one of my friends.”

      “The next day, around lunchtime, Amanda went back to their apartment to have a shower.”

      The night referred to is the 1′st November (Meredith in fact had dinner with three British friends in the home of one of them), The following day (when Amanda returns to the apartment for the shower) could therefore only have been 2′nd November – when Meredith’s lifeless body was found.

      Even if Sollecito or supporters claim that the night referred to by him was actually the 31′st October, there are problems. It was Halloween, and the people referred to here were out partying until the early hours. That would not be a “normal night”, and Meredith would not have been out with just one English friend. The reference to Amanda going back to their (presumably Via Della Pergola 7) apartment for the now infamous shower in the blood-spotted bathroom seals the time-line for me.

      The simple fact is almost certainly that Sollecito is referring to the night of 1′st November, going into the morning of 2′nd November. This then would be the first of many discrepancies in the various statements made by both Knox and Sollecito.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: