Home » Wrongful Convictions » “AMANDA KNOX:” CORROBORATING ARROGANCE

“AMANDA KNOX:” CORROBORATING ARROGANCE

When I first heard that there was going to be a new movie called “Amanda Knox” I met it with a healthy dose of skepticism, I had become hardened to what mainstream and tabloid media had produced about this young lady and her Italian friend in the past decade; I had learned not trust the opinions of people who read only headlines.

But I must say I was not only pleasantly surprised by the outcome, I welcomed it gladly like a breath of fresh air. Truth, finally, and that so many people in the commentary “got it” was a relief.  It was also a delight to see even mainstream media shocked by how the antagonists acted, they finally saw the arrogance that I knew so well.  You see, I am a researcher for the advocacy that helped Amanda and Raffaele correct misinformation in social media, I volunteered to read the “mountain of evidence” against them, along with several others, and then posted my notes online.

I know the “complex” first hand, so McGinn and Blackhurst’s use of “simple” is brilliant.

The guiltless in context with the people guilty of robbing them of their freedom and rights.  It evoked a visceral reaction in me that was a surprise, the usual eye-rolling annoyance gave way to white hot anger because the film was so intimate.  It brought the antagonists right into my home and, yes, I did yell “FU” at the TV a few times.

Amanda and Raffaele are those people you saw on film, no acting, the real thing.  Just two ordinary people who met everyone’s nightmare – duplicitous authorities. I came to know them first through their families, Amanda’s in person and Raffaele’s virtually.  I met both young people after their release and my opinion of them, formed while they were in prison, did not change.  Those people you see against that stark backdrop are exactly who they say they are, McGinn and Blackhurst captured their personalities perfectly.

They captured the essence of Giuliano Mignini, Valter Biscotti and Nick Pisa as well.  It sickened me to watch them preen for the audience, but the very important point I want to make is that the public’s dislike of Pisa, despite his drooling over headlines, is misplaced. Pisa is the tabloid jackal you see, but at least he is honest about it and that authenticity sets him aside from the other antagonists who have cloaked themselves in respectability; wolves in sheep’s clothing.

I also noted that the public largely ignored Mignini this time around, as usual, but paid a little more attention to Guede, progress made.  If my opinion matters to you, then kindly pay close attention to Prosecutor Mignini if you have not yet seen this film. To those who have, please watch it again and witness “Amanda Knox” parting the curtain to show you official confirmation bias at work in a justice system.

The stunning arrogance of Guede’s lawyer Biscotti, for example, about being the “better attorney” for the murderer while the uninformed public knows nothing about the Italian fast-track trial system vs. the regular trial system.  Can you imagine being found guilty in a court of law without being represented by a lawyer or being able to cross-examine your accuser?  Consider the legal plight of Raffaele and Amanda, outside looking in, during Guede’s trials while Biscotti swept their Constitutional rights away.

Giuliano Mignini’s interview was the most telling, he is right that he knows Italian law.  So well, in fact, that he used it to pull the wool over the eyes of Raffaele’s well-connected family (including sister the cop) just long enough to force the young man to “have his day in court” as mandated by law.  He also pulled the wool over the US Embassy in Italy by not declaring Amanda an official suspect until after her arrest, though she was under surveillance, wiretapped and Perugian authorities were preparing to interrogate her and Raffaele both.  Mignini’s signature on the detention forms was inked mere hours before help would arrive for both naïve students, and those papers are the tip of the legal iceberg.  Because of the wiretapping Mignini knew his unfettered access to the pair was coming to an end as soon as Amanda’s mother arrived.

I was most surprised to see Mignini’s mantra from court transcripts for the world to see: “Let’s consider.”  “Let’s imagine.”  “If only there was a video in the room.” Well, that last part is not in the film, only the case file along with many other examples of this so-called professional imagining “what may have happened.”  His penchant to “make up dialogue” for Meredith and Amanda was also present and this man has made up many disgusting things; that is without question.

Then there is the prosecutor’s denial of knowing how Lumumba’s name was fed to Amanda during the interrogation in contrast to his confirmed presence just outside the room; while he was engaged in advising the police.  Mignini is provably part of the more than a dozen Perugian law enforcement members present while she was abused, broken, and forced to sign away her life in a foreign language.  It is heartbreaking to see the part of the film when Amanda finally realized that nothing she said mattered to him, all that mattered was his opinion.

So Mignini knows intimately how Lumumba’s name was introduced and his denial of that fact in this film is pure gold.

You see the barest hint of his Madonna/Whore Complex in the film as well, osmotic evaluation of the legal dossier reveals a dirty old man entertaining the court with the latest script from his “soap opera.”  The scared foreign kid is “crazy,” the party-animal British Girls are “proper,” and the murder victim is “virginal.”  Satan, the Mason’s, Reefer Madness, Catfights, Guede’s Poop, it’s all there.  The man in the mirror is an arrogant official, a devil some would say, who lied to the victim’s family and accused innocent people of a crime he concocted in his own head.

McGinn and Blackhurst did a great job of taking a complex issue and simplifying it in ninety minutes. I invite you to take that time, kickback with a cocktail in the comfort of your own home and see how easy it is for an authority to scoop kids right off the street.  Amanda believes the public thinks she is a monster, but the most frightening monsters are the powerful ones pulling strings behind our backs.

Turn away from Amanda and Raffaele; and see the monster that stalked them.  Giuliano Mignini.

  • No wonder there are guilters furious about this documentary.

    • Michael J Butler

      When are the guilters not furious about anything?

      • Delilah7

        When a court rules in their favor. Then they shift to the most horrid gloating imaginable.

        • Michael J Butler

          Everything that comes out of a guilters mouth is horrid.

        • Tom Graham

          I think it’s fair to say that the pro-innocence community did the same after the Hellman-Zenetti motivation. Me included.

    • Delilah7

      The ones who actually watched it, that is, and I doubt many of them did before going into the “you lie!” accusations. I personally don’t care how furious they are.

  • Michael J Butler

    Great article Karen, well done. It’s great to know this documentary shines a bright light on this case and shows what Amanda and Raffaele went through and shows the type of person that Mignini really is, the ANTICHRIST of Italy.

  • VoiceofEurope

    …. only another piece of sh*t to mesmerize the hopelessly stupids …

    But note:

    Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito don’t get less guitly by shifting all the blame onto others.
    No way !

    Ms. Knox & Mr. Sollecito distributed Meredith’s blood all over the cottage. They walked barefoot through Meredit’s blood. They left their DNA over there. They were inside the cottage during the time of the killing and heard Meredith’s screams. It was Ms. Knox who washed Meredith’s blood from her hands …..

    Ms. Knox & Mr. Sollecito did, not Mr. Mignini !

    Karen, face the truth ….

    • David Steadson

      “Ms. Knox & Mr. Sollecito distributed Meredith’s blood all over the cottage”

      No they didn’t

      “They walked barefoot through Meredit’s blood.”

      No they didn’t

      “They left their DNA over there”

      No they didn’t

      “They were inside the cottage during the time of the killing and heard Meredith’s screams”

      No they weren’t

      “was Ms. Knox who washed Meredith’s blood from her hands …..”

      No it wasn’t

      Hope that helps, Voice of Europe!

      • VoiceofEurope

        No, sorry. It doesn’t help …..
        The untruth usually isn’t helpful !

    • Michael J Butler

      What Nonsense.

    • Ralph

      You’re whining to the wrong people. The commenters of this article didn’t release Amanda. The Italian supreme court did. Good times and lots of laughter

      • Delilah7

        “Voice of Europe” needs to clam up.

    • pdx11

      The truth is the case was just bad. And now it’s over. It’s one thing to think they secretly pulled off the perfect crime getting really lucky not leaving much evidence and getting an idiot patsy to take the fall, but it’s complete bonkers to think that the case against them was strong, when even taking all the evidence at face value, it was quite weak.

      Even guilt leaning commenters like Barbie Nadeau acknowledged the Massei conviction was lucky to squeak by on the weak evidence and the defense would have a good chance on appeal.

      That you guilters went through the entire case thinking this was some sort of clear cut straight forward Ted Bundy case with tons of evidence is why you were caught so blindsided by the final inevitable result. I’d love to help you understand why she was acquitted, but your brain can’t handle it. So you’ll be stuck carrying around the belief that the mafia or w/e bought off the courts until the end of days.

      • Delilah7

        You know, I’m actually kinda curious about when he said…

    • angriestdogintheworld

      Liar.

  • hikertom

    The most important thing you need to understand about the case against Amanda and Raffele is that it was not an honest mistake by well-meaning police and prosecutors. It was a deliberate and malicious fraud.

  • Rachel

    What causes people like yourself to be so tragically angry?

    • Michael J Butler

      Good question, Come up with any good answers?

    • VoiceofEurope

      … not angry …. only curious about the truth !

      It’s right ….. the criminal procedure / the legal dispute is over. But the same doesn’t apply to the social / the public discourse. This has to be continued till the complete truth is out and – of course – it will be continued.

      Rudy Guede was only an accomplice to others (res iudicata) which unfortunately means „those others“ are still at large / not clearly identified publicly / not clearly visible to everyone all over the world.

      An unacceptable status. Think you agree with this ?!

      But you can rest assured. As we know there will be no new trial against Ms. Knox. There is nothing to fear for Ms. Knox insofar. No reason to panic. Your protégé is not in danger …. even if she did it.

      It’s only about the real objective truth now, neither my personal truth nor your personal truth.

      So the public dispute will not be finished until every facet of the horrific brutal murder of innocent poor Meredith Kercher is resolved and final resolutions are achieved. There’s too much unexplained yet.

      In the meantime: You are free to express your thoughts & your opinion. I will respect it. So I would ask you to repect mine.

      • Delilah7

        Don’t care about your view of it. Up yours.

        • VoiceofEurope

          … not entirely optimum but ok, right atmosphere to work in ….

          • jackbutler5555

            Please understand. She meant it a loving, positive way.

          • VoiceofEurope

            …. of course.
            …. Some have their own ways to show sympathy ….

          • IsThisTheLife

            “… Some have their own ways to show sympathy ….”

            And some have a congenital inability to feel it.

          • Delilah7

            She was acquitted, TWICE. Guede is the murderer. Leave the poor girl alone!
            What the courts did to Knox is not just criminal, it’s EVIL. Insistence that “the truth come out” when it already has is only worsening it.

          • VoiceofEurope

            Yes, she was acquitted & she remains acquitted. There will be no new trial (think it’s unknown under italian law).

            But for all we know (and according to the Courts judgements):
            No, Guede is not the murderer. He is not the one who stabbed Meredith Kercher.

            So what we are seeing at the present time isn’t the whole truth. Obviously not.

          • hikertom

            How can you be so sure that Guede did not stab Meredith? Please cite some evidence to back up that assertion.

          • Delilah7

            Voice of Europe, this is Voice of America: SHADDUP.

      • jackbutler5555

        The high court sought facts and didn’t find any that justified the verdicts of the lower courts. I don’t buy the “unanswered questions” that Barbi Nadeau and the pro-guilt folks have been referring to for years. I don’t see the answers to the questions relevant to the verdict. In any case, I believe Italy permits prosecutors to renew the case with significant new evidence.

      • hikertom

        When I first became interested in this case I asked two questions: 1) Was more than one person involved in the murder? 2) Was the break-in staged? The case against Ms. Knox & Mr. Sollecito was predicated on an affirmative answer to those questions. I could find no proof substantiating those claims. Therefore, I think the most logical explanation is that Mr. Guede broke into the cottage with the intention of robbery and then murdered Ms. Kercher when she came home unexpectedly– and he acted alone.

        • VoiceofEurope

          Only two questions …

          Leaving aside the fact that your answers to those “two questions” are not correct in my mind there is a variety of other questions you have to ask as well.

          And don’t forget the essentially important benchmark: Qui bono ?

      • Rachel

        My comment was not intended for you, but the very sad individual who needed to attack John Kercher angriest whatever his name was

  • Tom Graham

    The whole saga is in retrospect an showcase of the human condition. All the events starting on November 1st 2007 and still ongoing at the ECHR are an expose of what human beings are capable of doing to each other when when faced with raw fear.

  • IsThisTheLife

    What people should be asking is how come an indigent ne’er-do-well like Guede is still being provided with expensive legal representation, eight years after he exhausted his appeals.

    This camp little shyster Biscotti is being paid by the state – i.e. out of the Italian people’s taxes – to continue his role as Guede’s ‘handler’ and PR spokesman. In effect, to carry on lying on behalf of not only Guede but also the criminals and thugs in uniforms and robes, people like Guiliano Mignini and Monica Napoleoni, who perpetrated this entire fraud, and its an utter f*%@ing disgrace.

    • VoiceofEurope

      – Mr. Walter Biscotti was Guedes lawyer but isn’t nowadays (same applies to Mr. Nicodemo Gentile)
      – Rudy Guede currently is respresented by a group of others. They are not
      payed out of taxes in this case (but BTW: generally court – appointed / indigent defense lawyers are common in the US too I think)
      – the new hearing on 12.20.2016 in Florence is due to contradictory results
      (Decision ISC Knox / Sollecito 2015 and Decision ISC Guede 2010).

      • IsThisTheLife

        All suitably vague – “a group of others”.

        I note the way you couch your words to try and give the impression that you’re someone with detailed, even ‘inside’ information and expertise, but I know bovine excreta when I smell it.

        • VoiceofEurope

          They are (as far as I know):
          Avv. Monica Grossi & Tommaso Pietrocarlo / Roma

          • IsThisTheLife

            Who cares? The simple point is that SOMEONE is still abusing their power to appropriate state funds for manifestly corrupt purposes.

            I suppose could be wrong, and it’s a matter of someone’s altruistic desire to see “justice for poor Rudy”. Snort!

      • IsThisTheLife

        And by the way, there were no “contradictory results” (sic) – to claim so would imply that the courts which found Guede guilty ALSO found Knox & Sollecito guilty.

        This is, of course, what certain people (such as yourself) want people to believe.

        Actually, Guede was found guilty of murder “acting with others”, and if this “judicial truth” is held to be FACTUAL truth, then all it means is that the murder case is STILL OPEN and that Italian law-enforcement should be seeking these “others”.

        • VoiceofEurope

          No, your conclusion (….. in your first paragraph) doesn’t make sense that way ….

          The contradiction is (from Guedes point of view & possibly from the viewpoint of the Florence Court …. we’ll have to wait & see) that there is one conviction (Guede: not as the killer / knifer himself but as an accpomplice to two others) and one acquittal with respect to the prime suspects (Knox & Sollecito).

          And yes ….. the main perpetrators are still at large.

          • IsThisTheLife

            ” ……Guede: not as the killer / knifer himself but as an accpomplice to two others”.

            Orlly?

            I could ask you to show me where any forensic evidence was presented that proved “two others” were involved. Or even where a declaration of “judicial truth” was made by a judge that “two others” were involved, but that would just be inviting another torrent of BS.

            I actually hope that Guede does get another day in court – the publicity will surely be MOST embarassing for the Italian judiciary.

          • IsThisTheLife

            “And yes ….. the main perpetrators are still at large.”

            If that were so, one would expect to see at least a desultory effort to identify them.

            But all that we actually see happening are sickening attempts to carry on defending the indefensible (quite literally).

      • hikertom

        Do you think the Perugia police are searching day and night to find Guede’s accomplices? Of course not. They know that Guede murdered Ms. Kercher, and he acted alone. The notion that he had accomplices was a contrivance necessary to justify indicting Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito. It’s too bad they can’t just start the case over again from the beginning.

    • Delilah7

      Why? Because he’s a stool pigeon who was being protected by the Peruga police, who’d go to jail if he started to sing.

  • Michael J Butler

    A Very Merry Christmas to everybody and to those you care about regardless if you are pro-innocent or pro-guilt.