Amanda Knox Case – The Third Indication Knox Was Intentionally Framed By Italian Police: Selectivity of Evidence Suppression

The Break-In: A defense attorney wearing leather shoes showing the ease of entry.

The Break-In: A defense attorney wearing leather shoes showing the ease of entry.

A third indication that Giuliano MIgnini and the Italian police intentionally framed Amanda Knox and Raffaele Solelcito in the murder of Meredith Kercher can be seen in the manner of evidence collection and avoidance. Simply by looking at the Prosecutor Mignini’s selectivity in regard to the evidence of the crime – what to examine or not examine, what to suppress, and what evidence to destroy – allows us a direct window on to Mignini’s actual objectives, and by extension, that of the Kercher murder investigation by the Italian police as a whole.

Think of it this way. If the prosecutor Mignini honestly believed his own theory of the crime, then testing any evidence, from his perspective, can only support his theory. At worst, any such testing would not be helpful. If the prosecution really believed Knox and Sollecito were guilty of the Kercher murder, or staged a break-in, or gave a false alibi and really left their apartment the evening Kercher was killed, then they would aggressively collect any evidence that bore information on any of those issues. But in regard to each of these matters, the prosecution did not pursue that evidence. In fact, quite to the contrary, such evidence was strenuously avoided.

In the room of the ‘break-in’, a forensic test on the broken glass could have determined the direction in which the glass was broken – from the inside to the outside, as Mignini contended, to suggest the ‘break-in’ was staged; or from the outside to the inside, as the defense contended, to suggest the ‘break-in’ was actual and performed by Guede alone. I must add here, having played baseball in my neighborhood growing up, in my experience a window tends to shatter in the direction of the object moving through it. Glass inside, means it was broken from the outside in, and common sense tells me this is so, without even having to resort to a forensic expert. But if there were any doubt, why not test the glass?

The only reason for not testing the glass, is because PM Mignini knows his theory that the glass was broken from the inside-out is false. Why not test the white powder found on the windowsill, to see if it was tracked in from the outside wall to on top of the scattered clothes inside the room? Because it would reflect the reality of the act of Guede’s entry through the window, and the truth that the break-in was genuine and not staged.

Another example, is the refusal to test the ‘presumable’ semen stain found on the pillow underneath Ms Kercher’s hips, elevating her pelvis, and placed there after she had been mortally wounded by a savage knife cut to her throat. What possible reason could there be for not testing that semen stain? Whatever excuse Prosecutor Mignini gives to avoid testing it is immaterial. The fact is, it is critical evidence, and Mignini didn’t want it tested. Let’s follow through logically what that tells us about Migini’s objectives.

Again, if Mignini thought Sollecito contributed the semen stain or even might have contributed the semen stain, Mignini would have wanted it tested. The fact that the prosecution didn’t allow the stain to be tested, shows Mignini not only didn’t want the information as to whom it belonged entered into the case record, but that he also believed it was not Sollecito. The failure of Mignini to test the semen stain is a clear indication that Mignini believed Sollecito was innocent of this crime, and that he, Giuliano Migini was intentionally framing two innocent people for a crime he knew they had nothing to do with.

The alibi of Knox and Sollcito, that they spent the entire evening of the night of the murder at Sollecito’s apartment and never left, has been thoroughly consistent. The confused statements extracted through pre-planned coercive interrogations amounting to nothing short of psychological torture do not represent a departure from their account of their whereabouts, at least not to any honest, rational observer.

According to Sollecito’s book, “Honor Bound”, Sollecito’s defense had requested the police recover CCTV video footage of two cameras between his apartment and the cottage where Kercher was killed. The police turned down this request without explanation. If the police believed Sollecito and Knox had left Sollecito’s apartment on the night of the murder, of course the police would have been aggressive in recovering the camera footage. But again, Mignini and the Italian police, by not recovering the CCTV footage that might provide information regarding the whereabluts of Knox and Sollecito that evening, demonstrates that Mignini and the police didn’t want that information in the case record, and knew that Knox and Sollecito’s alibi were in fact truthful. The failure of Mignini and the police to recover the CCTV footage shows they actually believed Knox and Sollecito when they said they never left Sollecito’s apartment, yet proceeded to intentionally frame these two people they plainly believed to be wholly innocent of the Kercher killing.

In further support of their alibi, were the computers of Sollecito, Knox and Kercher. When the police examined Sollecito’s two laptops and Knox’s and Kercher’s laptops, three were destroyed. Sollecito claims in ‘Honor Bound’, “I’m convinced to this day that the computer could have exonerated me completely, and probably Amanda too, if it had been handled properly.” Sollecito explains, “…the polizia postale – supposedly experts in handling technology issues-had seized two of my computers along with Amanda’s and Meredith’s and somehow wrecked three of the four hard disks while trying to decipher them. The police blamed the problem on an electrical surge, although they could not begin to account for it happening three times in a row.” (emphasis Sollecito).

To suggest the Italian police did not deliberately destroy these computer disks is beyond belief. Others may wish to entertain such unfathomable incompetence by supposed professionals, I just can’t. It provides, in Kercher attorney Maresca’s lexicon, “a splendid parallel” to when the Lab technician Stefanoni claimed she hadn’t done follow up tests to confirm that footprints revealed in luminol tests were actually made in blood. No one could believe Stefanoni could be that incompetent. And it turned out later that she wasn’t, as she had performed the follow up tests for blood and the tests were negative. Stefanoni had simply lied on the witness stand (also known as committing perjury) when she said the testing hadn’t been done, and allowed the jury the false belief that the footprints were in blood when she had proved herself they were not. Stefanoni was not incompetent, she was corrupt. And we may safely attribute the same virtues to the polizia postale and their ‘accidental’ evidence destroying power surges. It is inconceivable that Stefanoni was not charged with perjury, a fact in itself that speaks volumes as to the integrity of the Italian justice system.

Once again, if Mignini and the Italian police were not certain that Knox and Sollecito spent the evening at home and were completely innocent of the Kercher murder, there would be no need to deliberately destroy the computers that would support their alibi. Yet another clear indication Mignini and the Italian police intentionally framed knox and Sollecito while knowing them to be innocent.

Lastly, I’ll mention in passing the evidence of a trail of blood leading to the downstairs apartment, and numerous blood samples from inside the downstairs apartment. The prosecution attributed these samples to being “cat blood”. However Stefanoni’s lab continued the testing as though they were dealing with human samples. The lab’s machines only return results for human DNA, not cats or dogs, and according to the analysis I consulted.  ’lab records suggest that at least 6 samples were genetically-profiled (via STR analysis), but none of the ensuing 6 profiles have been disclosed by the prosecution’ (From the analysis of evidence provided at the ‘murderofmeredithkercher.com website’ found here; link).

The downstairs apartment was not broken into, yet the blood evidence was found inside, including two samples taken from the light switch, which were among the samples producing human DNA profiles that were not turned over by the prosecution. Can I go out on a limb and suggest the human DNA profile from the downstairs apartment that the prosecution is withholding will be that of Meredith Kercher and/or Rudy Guede?

The point is, that the evidence is being withheld. The downstairs apartment wasn’t physically broken into, but Meredith Kercher had the keys to the apartment, as she had agreed to water the pot plants for her then Italian boyfriend downstairs. Rudy could have benefitted from a change of clothes from downstairs, did he go there after he killed Meredith? Why wouldn’t the prosecutor want to allow that evidence into the record? Because it means Rudy also broke into the downstairs apartment, and its unlikely there would be any trace of Knox or Sollecito down there. It doesn’t fit Mignini’s theory of the crime, so the defense isn’t allowed to see it.

The mere fact of denying crucial evidence to the defense that would prove their innocence is already an indication that the prosecutor Mignini and the Italian police are aware they are framing Knox and Sollecito for a crime they had nothing to do with. But this implication of knowingly framing innocent people also extends to the judges themselves.

All the judges that denied the same evidence to the defendants Knox and Sollecito are in a similar position to Mignini and the Italian polcie in this regard. When the judges are suppressing the defendants’ ability to prove their innocence by restricting their access to testing evidence, it shows the judges aren’t looking for the truth either, they are looking for a conviction. And moreover, it shows the Italian judges who convicted Knox and Sollecito are fully aware that they are innocent of Kercher’s murder, yet nonetheless want them to spend decades in prison for a crime of which the judges know they are innocent.

When the prosecutor is also the lead investigator, the judge is also the jury foreman, and the independent DNA expert is the supervisor of the prosecution’s perjuring lab witness, and none of them are interested in the truth, but solely motivated to obtain a conviction they know is unjust, why call it a trial at all?

Refusing to test the evidence doesn’t merely imply Knox and Sollecito may not have received a fair trial, it means they never really had any kind of a trial, not one that any civilized country could stomach anyway. That’s why it is such a sad exercise trying to engage with the judge’s ‘motivations’, their written explanation and reasoning by which they have found guilt for Knox and Sollecito, or that Guede killed Kercher along with others. The judges’ reasoning, isn’t really reasoning. It’s just fanciful excuses to sustain an unjust conviction.

And the excuses become increasingly absurd as the last pretenses of evidence and fairness are stripped away from the case record. Hence Judge Nencini has concluded that women have “Y” chromosomes, to avoid acknowledging that the ‘bra clasp’ was indeed contaminated with three other male DNA profiles, and for good measure Nencini has now found Sollecito’s DNA on the knife blade along with Kercher. The explanations aren’t real. The judges aren’t real. The trials aren’t real. The convictions aren’t real. The case was never real.

The only trial that pursued the truth, by engaging independent experts to examine the central evidence, was before Judge Hellman. This resulted in full acquittals, finding furthermore, that there was no staged break-in – and by necessity, implying Rudy Guede alone killed Meredith Kercher.

Will the Italian Supreme Court really commit the last monstrous act in this tragedy and finally condemn two innocent people to spending decades in prison for a crime of which the judges themselves are certain they are innocent? Can the price of Italian “honor” be so high?

Or might the Italian judiciary still salvage some honor by simply facing the truth.

Meredith Kercher was killed by Giuliano Mignini, not with a knife, but with a phone call. Were it not for Mignini and the Perugians freeing Rudy Guede from the Milan police and returning him to Perugia just days before the killing, Meredith Kercher would still be alive. And the Italain judiciary is the only body that could have prevented Mignini from his catastrophic failure in judgement regarding Rudy Guede that ultimately cost Meredith Kercher her life.

But embarrassment over Rudy Guede was only one reason Mignini had in framing Knox and Sollecito. There were other circumstances motivating Mignini to seize the lives of two innocent people at this moment in time. Mignini’s career was fast imploding for his disastrous efforts to insinuate himself into the Monster of Florence cases, a disgraceful chapter we will look at in the next article – on The Special Motive of Giuliano Mignini in Framing Amanda Knox.