Before we talk about the lost tapes, let’s look at the overall situation that currently exists because the Italian Supreme Court recently overturned the exoneration of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.
The need for Italy to update their antiquated judicial system has been echoed by many scholars for several years. Their system has evolved very little since the Napoleonic Code from France was adopted, or actually mandated in 1805. Napoleon Bonaparte (of France) was crowned as “King of Italy” in Milan’s cathedral on
May 26, 1805.
Italy’s judicial system runs under a sovereign umbrella of absolute power insulated from any accountability for their actions with special constitutional protection from the executive branch of government.
These sovereign powers include, but are not limited to, the power to appoint top administrative personnel to life-time terms
(like miniature Gods).
Only the Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura
(Superior Council of Magistracy) can remove an appointed official.
This fact was apparently used by Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini after he was tried, convicted and sentenced for “abuse of office” for ordering illegal wiretapping (which indicates he had probably gotten away with it many times before.)
But as this “Mafia Style” judicial system works in mysterious ways, after all was said and done, and Mignini had “actually been convicted,” someone was told to basically proclaim (in his best PeeWee Herman voice): “Oops, excuse me, I think we tried this case in the wrong jurisdiction, my bad, sorry.”
Mignini was allowed back to pursue his favorite pastime:
“Destroying all evil on Earth!”
A staff writer for CBS’s Crimesider published this judicious analogy:
“Not since fellow European Max Von Sydow played the role of Father Martin in the 1973 occult classic The Exorcist has an audience seen such a fantastical portrayal of a self-styled avenger pitted against imagined forces of evil. The only element missing from the prosecutor’s otherwise head-spinning performance was Mignini, himself, levitating before the judge’s eyes.”
This exhibition of flagrant disregard for human dignity by Prosecutor Mignini towards Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito also brings into question the sanity of his obvious delusional reality.
Mignini is apparently in the ultimate position of power as even Judge Massei rubber stamped every illogical and non-sensible fable submitted by Mignini as “Circumstantial Evidence.”
Not only is Mignini’s behavior offensive to the sensibilities of American Values and the American Judicial System, but we actually have a few American Journalists rewarding this inappropriate behavior by encouraging it with slanderous insinuations about Amanda’s innocence.
Amanda Knox has never sought to be a public figure. Therefore, she has the right to privacy in her life as do all Americans. These unscrupleless journalists that seek attention through bullying an innocent American girl who has already been unjustly brutalized is unconscionable.
Let’s start with a narcissistic nitwit named Ann Coulter, who according Chelsea Hoffman: “Hits it out of the park?”
Come on Chelsea, grow a brain!
Miss Coulter, I would have more respect for you if you had any morals. I know you can’t possibly believe all the false information that you disseminate.
Let’s play a game, it’s called:
Ann Coulter: A genius or dunce?
1. Your statement:
“there are so many anomalies in Amanda’s alibi and demeanor after the crime.”
100% of the “psychological” evaluations of Amanda’s demeanor were by non-psychologically certified thugs of Mignini’s imperial police force.
As a twenty year old girl at the time, Amanda behaved much better than you would have at that age.
See, anyone can make unqualified assertions, but am I right? *laugh*
Her alibi was having spent the night with Raffaele smoking some pot and watching a movie on the PC.
Amanda’s alibi has not swayed. Under an illegal and intense interrogation, deprived of water and not allowed to urinate all night (inhumane and unacceptable), Amanda was coerced to concede that she may not be thinking clearly.
Gee Miss Coulter, do you think that with literally twelve police officers, motivated by Mignini to extract a confession with screaming and head slapping, it could possibly cause Amanda any confusion?
No? Wow, that’s why you’re a genius (in your own mind).
One point for you!
2. You said:
“Or, is it like the Casey Anthony trial, and people just refuse to believe a pretty, young female is capable of committing a vicious crime?”
Hey, you are the one referencing an irrelevant comparison.
But just to humor you; Casey Anthony at the minimum should have been found guilty of child neglect. She admittedly did not know where her child was for thirty days resulting in death of the child.
Clearly, that is child neglect, a Class 4 Felony in many states.
So your assertion is clearly incorrect.
No again? Ok then, you are obviously delusional like Mignini.
Another point for you! (NOT)
3. Your declaration:
“Among the evidence for her guilt is that the murder weapon was found — freshly bleached — in the apartment of Amanda’s boyfriend with Meredith’s DNA on the blade and Amanda’s DNA on the handle.”
Miss Coulter, the redundancy of this assertion is beginning to get so monotonous.
But until you go back and complete sixth grade science, I’ll spell it out, again, just for you! *smile*
Bleach (Sodium hypochlorite, NaClO) is a compound causing Redox in the form of Rapid Oxidation.
Oxidation of course is simply the chemical modification of susceptible compounds to the disruption and loss of Electrons in the outer valence shell of the Atoms in a Molecule.
This destabilization causes a rapid deterioration of the Molecular structure.
Some chemical compounds like blood can resist this oxidation better than other more simplistic compounds.
Therefore, if the knife, as you say, had been freshly bleached, then simplistic compounds like starch would be removed long before any residue of blood.
So as the knife was 100% certified to reveal a minute trace amount of starch on the blade, there is a ZERO chance that blood could have been removed to leave only starch residue.
It was proven by Conti and Vecchiotti, there was NO hemoglobin residue on the knife.
That also leaves us with the delusional logic that two highly intelligent people could have cleaned all their DNA from a crime scene (impossible even by Einstein), showing how DNA savvy they would have to be to accomplish this feat. Then with all this supposed DNA knowledge, bring back the knife to use again at dinner time? Not to mention that kitchen knife was discredited as being too wide for the knife wound entries.
The kitchen knife allegation is so outrageously unbelievable that only a sociopath could bring an assemblage of validity to this Satanic scenario.
But hey, if you buy it Miss Coulter, another point for your intelligence!
4. I believe that you trust everything you hold in your heart to be true and fair.
But, I do not believe that anyone even as delusional as yourself could deny that it is merely second hand information. Were you actually on-site during the murder? Were you on-site during the interrogation?
Obviously not, you have received 100% of the distorted facts from an unreliable, discriminatory, misogynistic judicial system.
Let’s face it, of all the people involved in this railroad job, only Amanda (the only female) was subjected to the humiliation of being told she had HIV to extract a list of her sexual partners. It seems Italy makes a national past time of humiliating and degrading women, check their history.
5. Do you believe the prosecution is being totally honest with you?
Or are you disseminating information that you believe or know to be untrue?
Do you know a national guilter named John Follain?
He is currently featured on some hate site called TJMK.
Good old Mr. Follain plays the facade so well of sounding impartial.
But just like you, he makes his blood money from harassing an innocent young woman.
Mr. Follain seems proficient in his interviews, I believe he is at least accurate in repeating quotes from his interviewees, don’t you?
Mr. Follain is the journalist that interviewed Amanda’s parents, Edda Mellas and her ex-husband, Curt Knox in Perugia on June 15th, 2008.
Without having to dig though archives at TIMESONLINE, here is a quick link to the article:
Note: This is a PDF file from a trusted site.
Miss Coulter , I’ll bet that you’d be the first to point out the reference to the Calumny statement.
For everyone else that is not endowed with Miss Coulter’s vastly superior intellect, please allow me to point out the date again of this interview, June 15th, 2008. That’s about 7.5 months after the murder.
On Page 4:
“Amanda was abused physically and verbally. She told us she was hit in the back of the head by a police officer with an open hand, at least twice.”
The police told her, ‘If you ask for a lawyer, things will get worse for you’ and ‘If you don’t give us some explanation for what happened, you’re going to go to jail for a very long time.’”
Edda adds tearfully: “She w as told she wouldn’t ever see her family again, and her family is everything to her.”
Knox gave them a description of the officer who allegedly struck her, but it cannot be published for legal reasons. The Perugia police have denied striking her and have said she understood what she was signing.
Yep, they did in fact “repeat” what they were told by their daughter.
Of course, Calumny must be made with the intention of malice or purposeful lying.
But what is truly questionable is the motive of John Follain to have purposely led Amanda’s parents to make such statements. John Follain is very aware of the Calumny law. John Follain has been extremely close to the prosecution team to get his “inside information” for his book. John Follain was observed several times chumming up to the prosecution team during the trials.
So what piece of information did John Follain inadvertently reveal in his interview?
Well, how about this (still page 4):
“Only a small part of Knox’s taped statement has been leaked to the media; the full transcript hasn’t surfaced, but according to Curt, the police asked Knox to “visualize what could have happened”.”
Wow, please correct me if I’m wrong, but when Mr. Knox started referring to the tape that “was never made,” Mr. Follain never even flinched. I guess long before the first trial, Dec. 5th, 2009, the missing tape was not an issue as it was not missing.
That means in an eighteen month period (June of 2008 to December of 2009) the tape got erased or destroyed, just like the hard-drives on both Personal Computers.
Now isn’t that interesting?
(But not surprising.)
Miss Coulter, I have no doubt that you will merely find some grammatical or punctuation errors in my writing and proclaim yourself superior.
But I have done my best using your style of fun loving sarcasm to convey why Amanda will never be abandoned by millions of patriotic Americans who value liberty.
So please don’t pout, Miss Coulter.
Just go to your little vanity mirror as usual,
and dance to your little anthem: