perugia shock

                                 A Weekend in Hell

Finally Mignini pulled out his secret weapon.
He met an American tourist and she told him that Amanda was guilty because she lied.
Not only that: he observed Amanda during the projection of the pictures of Meredith and she wasn’t watching!
Now that they heard such stringent arguments for sure judges are going to condemn her…

For the rest Mignini’s repertoire was the same. “The simulation”, as he calls the break-in, is proven by the fact that the blinds, according to Filomena, were half closed. Therefore a rock couldn’t have been thrown.
What a pity that Rudi can have simply climbed the wall, opened the blinds and gone back to the platform in the garden. From there the skillful basketball player could have easily hit the window with the rock at the first try.

It’s unbelievable that the breaking of that window passed to the nomenclature of the case as “the simulation”, “the simulated break-in”.

Even defense lawyers may happen to say “now let’s talk about the simulation”.

Mignini talks, and people follow him. Well, not Perugia Shock, where that broken window is just a broken window, since signs on the wood, distribution of the glass on floor and sill, position of the rock, only show the perfect physics of a rock thrown from the platform.

The problem is always the same: it’s like if someone was suggesting theories to him. And he would do them.

They tell him “there was glass on the clothes”. And he makes the simulation theory.
They tell him “from the drawer a strong smell of bleach came”. And he does the cleaned-knife theory.
They tell him “They called the 112 after we arrived”, “We surprised them doing the laundry”, “She threw her sweatshirt”,  “She turned crazy when she heard the name of Patrick”, “The footprint is Raffaele’s”…
And he theorizes that Amanda killed Meredith!

That’s what happens when you count on people’s words. But to establish the truth PROOFS ARE NEEDED, NOT WORDS!

When you hear only words, along with the same old stories of people suddenly going crazy…  or of drugs that make you kill…  it means those words are exactly what they look to be: not true.

Mignini warned the jury that if they cancel the conviction Amanda will certainly “escape”. So, he would still consider her a prisoner, even after that she’s set free! He already decided he’s going to appeal through Supreme Court! “He will never let her alone”: Douglas Preston was damn right when he said that.

But the lexicon is important. A broken window must be called “broken window”, not “simulation”, and going home is called “leaving”, not “escaping”.

Rudy escaped, since he had killed Meredith. Amanda never escaped. Amanda remained in Perugia, without her house, without her stuff, and tried to collaborate to the investigation. Amanda, unlike the English girls, who also left the country, trusted the police, and they repaid her in this way.

He who uses the wrong words lacks in respect, lacks in morality. And the lack of morality leads to the error.

Mignini and Maresca, are obsessed about that window. They agree that “the simulation” is the core of the case!

There’s a dead girl found on the other side of the house but what is the core of the case? A broken window!

A window without any importance. As we have seen Rudi may have easily broken the window, climbed it, entered the house and started “living” there: using the bathroom, drinking the orange juice, touching everything…
Just as he did in the nursery house, just as the thief in the lawyers firm did (and guess who is that thief).

Or maybe he didn’t climb. It’s not that important! Maybe he went with someone else. They broke the window. In that moment Meredith arrived and he approached her before she could notice the broken window. He maybe asked to use the bathroom and, once inside, the other one attacked Meredith. And he joined. As Alessi said that he told him.

It’s not the window the core of the case, let’s talk of more important things.

Lawyer accusing

Remember I always pointed out that on December 18 the biologist who entered the house were too perfect, the inspection was even broadcast live: it looked like they knew something important would have been found.
Finally the defense starts considering these things! Even if they are written only here and in English…

The scientific police asked on Decemebr 13 to reenter the house to photograph the footprints from another angle (actually they said to make the luminol, indeed they will make the luminol). Raffaele’s lawyer Donatella Donati, today, said loud and clear that was an excuse. The real reason was to go take the piece of bra, that they knew it was there.

In the meanwhile, in those days, the defense kept asking to test “Raffaele’s shoe-print” (another lexical mistake, of course, since that shoe-print found besides Meredith body wasn’t Raffaele’s), but the preliminary judge would always refuse it. Why?

Why Matteini refused to study the shoe-tprint? Why Massei refused the DNA review? Or to test the semen stain?
They should explain to us why they refuse to perform tests that they know may exonerate the defendant. They should explain to us why they violate the law so evidently.

By the way, the request kept being refused. So Francesco Sollecito decided to publicly show that “Raffaele’s shoe-print”, at the time only proof against his son.
Together with his consultant Francesco Vinci, papa Sollecito demonstrated on TV that the shoe-print wasn’t Raffaele’s.
Next day, Donati recalled, the DNA on the bra clasp was found!

Do you start to understand what happened to that bra clasp and to that knife? Why some DNA mysteriously appeared on a knife which was no compatible with the wounds, was clean, was kept at home? Why some other DNA appeared on that bra clasp? Think the most imaginative, the most unbelievable thing…  Yes, that’s what happened.

Donati also offered another explanation for the luminol footprints: it must have been Amanda, sometimes, coming out of the shower with some soap on her feet. Alternative explanations are always welcome. That’s what judges who want to acquit need.

She also revealed another proceeding started by Mignini. That day, December 18, one of Raffele’s lawyers, as we remember, had a look around the house and found a little knife in the garden. And asked it to be tested.

This, for Mignini, was a crime (I can’t even try to figure which) and he charged him.

Now that you know these things listen to this wiretapped conversation.

Raffaele’s uncle: “We should accuse the all of them”.
Raffaele’s dad: “What accuse them? These people have only to be skinned alive. I hope they are listening to us. I should pass over Napoleoni with my car. Then drive back and forth until I’m sure that she’s dead”.

They were listening of course (that’s what we pay them for, to spy on our conversations…) but damn, what did she do to deserve so much hate from a correct person as Francesco Sollecito?

I guess you guys, while waiting for a court to take care of the problem, can start giving an answer.

For the rest the hearing reserved only some more science all’amatriciana and even alla carbonara, by Comodi,  some illogical arguments and the usual insults to Amanda.

Dime junk you already know by heart….

I almost forgot: for Mignini Amanda’s family spent over one million euro only in PR! Damn, they were rich…