Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

To feel very sorry for Raffaele Sollecito?

267 replies

MarmaladeTwatkins · 01/07/2013 10:36

He was interviewed on that turgid telly programme Daybreak this morning. He has a re-trial hanging over his head and says he doesn't know how much longer he can go on.

I'm in the 'they weren't involved' camp, but even if I wasn't, he was acquitted of the crime he was accused of. Surely it isn't right to dangle this over his head forever. Imagine living with that. Must be awful.

I remarked that I felt sorry for him to another parent this morning who was discussing it and she said "Well your sympathy is misplaced." Hmm I don't think that I am being U in feeling sympathy for him, or Amanda Knox.

OP posts:
MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 10:40

Basically, all of the circumstantial evidence (dishes being washed/timing of calls etc) could have rings run around it by a bright toddler.

So much of it has been disproved. The Albanian witness, the Italian shopkeeper who says they bought bleach from him... all proved as bollocks.

OP posts:
noblegiraffe · 02/07/2013 10:57

It also queries why someone would want a shower, having had a shower the previous evening. Gosh, that really does make me think she did it.

Those who think Knox must be guilty because she pointed the finger at an innocent man need to check out the work of The Innocence Project. There are many cases of people confessing to murder themselves under interrogation, when they have later been exonerated by DNA evidence. If it is common for people to confess, when innocent, under interrogation, it would be understandable that she followed the police's lead in blaming someone else.

MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 11:04

The Lumumba confession was discredited in court. The jury would have been told to disregard it. I am Hmm that people are still droning on about it.

That's a great link, Noble.

OP posts:
Portofino · 02/07/2013 11:10

It wasn't even admissable in court for the criminal trial. Unfortunately they allowed Lumumba's civil suit to run concurrently, and off course that was his main evidence.

Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:21

Just to be clear, I didn't say Amanda Knox was guilty of murder because she pointed the finger at someone else. I said she was guilty of defamation, and of wrecking the life on an innocent person for at least a year, if not much much longer. And therefore not deserving of much sympathy. I have read this thread carefully but on that point my opinion has not changed.

Portofino · 02/07/2013 11:23

the DNA of Raffaele Sollecito on Meredith?s bra-clasp in her locked bedroom; contamination

?the almost-entire naked footprint of Raffaele on a bathmat that in no way fits that of the other male in this case ? Rudy Guede; not true

?the fact that Raffaele?s own father blew their alibi that they were together in Raffaele?s flat at the time of the killing with indisputable telephone records; not true

?the DNA of Meredith Kercher on the knife in Raffaele?s flat which Raffaele himself sought to explain as having been from accidentally ?pricking? Meredith?s hand in his written diary despite the fact Meredith had never been to his flat (confirmed by Amanda Knox); disproved most likely contamination. It is easier to remove dna by cleaning than blood. No blood was found on the knife.

?the correlation of where Meredith?s phones were found to the location of Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guedes?s flats; circumstantial

?the computer records which show that no-one was at Raffaele?s computer during the time of the murder despite him claiming he was using that computer; Computer hard drives were wiped.

?Amanda?s DNA mixed with Meredith Kercher?s in five different places just feet from Meredith?s body; Not true

?the utterly inexplicable computer records the morning after the murder starting at 5.32 am and including multiple file creations and interactions thereafter all during a time that Raffaele and Amanda insist they were asleep until 10.30am; circumstantial

?the separate witnesses who testified on oath that Amanda and Raffaele were at the square 40 metres from the girls? cottage on the evening of the murder and the fact that Amanda was seen at a convenience store at 7.45am the next morning, again while she said she was in bed; Disproved in court

?the accusation of a completely innocent man by Amanda Knox; Under illegal interrogation

? the fact that when Amanda Knox rang Meredith?s mobile telephones, ostensibly to check on the ?missing? Meredith, she did so for just three seconds - registering the call but making no effort to allow the phone to be answered in the real world Circumstantial

?the knife-fetish of Raffaele Sollecito and his formal disciplinary punishment for watching animal porn at his university ? so far from the wholesome image portrayed; media spin

?the fact that claimed multi-year kick-boxer Raffaele apparently couldn?t break down a flimsy door to Meredith?s room when he and Amanda were at the flat the morning after the murder but the first people in the flat with the police who weren?t martial artists could; He didn't try

?the extensive hard drug use of Sollecito as told on by Amanda Knox; Not true - they smoked a bit of weed

?the fact that Amanda knew details of the body and the wounds despite not being in line of sight of the body when it was discovered; Not true - the first people in the room told Rafaelle who told AK

?the lies of Knox on the witness stand in July 2009 about how their drug intake that night (?one joint?) is totally contradicted by Sollecito?s own contemporaneous diary; Proves what?

?the fact that after a late evening?s questioning, Knox wrote a 2,900 word email home which painstakingly details what she said happened that evening and the morning after that looks highly like someone committing to memory, at 3.30 in the morning, an extensive alibi; Proves what?

?the fact that both Amanda and Raffaele both said they would give up smoking dope for life in their prison diaries despite having apparently nothing to regret; Probably because it made their memory of the evening a bit hazy - and look where that got them.

?the fact that when Rudy Guede was arrested, Raffaele Sollecito didn?t celebrate the ?true? perpetrator being arrested (which surely would have seen him released) but worried in his diary that a man whom he said he didn?t know would ?make up strange things? about him despite him just being one person in a city of over 160,000 people; The man did in deed make up strange things about him - he was right to worry

?the fact that both an occupant of the cottage and the police instantly recognised the cottage had not been burgled but had been the subject of a staged break-in where glass was on top of apparently disturbed clothes; Disproved

?that Knox and Sollecito both suggested each other might have committed the crime and Sollecito TO THIS DATE does not agree Knox stayed in his flat all the night in question; Illegal interrogation again - they were both told the other would not support their alibi and asked to imagine what happened.

?the bizarre behaviour of both of them for days after the crime; Media spin

?the fact that cellphone records show Knox did not stay in Sollecito?s flat but had left the flat at a time which is completely coincidental with Guede?s corroborated presence near the girl?s flat earlier in the evening; not true

?the fact that Amanda Knox?s table lamp was found in the locked room of Meredith Kercher in a position that suggested it had been used to examine for fine details of the murder scene in a clean up; there was no murder clean up

?the unbelievable series of changing stories made up by the defendants after their versions became challenged; Knox?s inexplicable reaction to being shown the knife drawer at the girl?s cottage where she ended up physically shaking and hitting her head.

They changed their story only once - under the illegal interrogation. Imagine going to your house where your friend has been killed and being asked to check the knife drawer. That would probably make me freak out.

noblegiraffe · 02/07/2013 11:25

I've just read the first link about phone records and am completely baffled by what it is supposed to show. It suggests that RS and his dad, in the course of a 4 minute phonecall came up with the 'cover story' about a water leak. Further phonecalls, even shorter in duration, it suggests were for him and his father to get the murder alibi straight. I suspect that it would take longer than that to confess a murder to your dad and have him agree to cover it up for you.

Seriously? That's two links of bullshit. What's next?

noblegiraffe · 02/07/2013 11:25

Tigerlily, have you read my innocence project link? What do you make of it re Knox?

MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 11:27

Porto, you are my hero. I could NOT be arsed going through all of that again so thanks for doing it! Flowers

OP posts:
Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:29

I did noblegiraffe. She didn't confess though. She accused someone else.

noblegiraffe · 02/07/2013 11:29

That table lamp must have been pretty good during the clean up operation if they managed to get rid of all their DNA and manage to leave plenty of DNA belonging to the actual murderer.

Are people not embarrassed by the standard of argument which they are posting? Confused

MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 11:29

If all that you can pin on AK is that she made a false statement (under extreme duress, and she was manipulated into making) which she very quickly retracted and wasn't even included in court evidence then you are clutching at straws.

OP posts:
noblegiraffe · 02/07/2013 11:30

Tigerlily, people confess that they did a crime that they didn't when the police lead them in that direction. It is obvious, therefore, that people might point the finger at someone else, if, in similar circumstances, the police lead them in that direction.

MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 11:32

"Are people not embarrassed by the standard of argument which they are posting?"

Grin
OP posts:
Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:32

Marmalade, when have I ever said anything else? I've never said she's guilty of anything except defamation. In interested in the evidence other people have listed one way or another but it's all pretty tenuous on both sides due to the vast number of procedural errors. The only thing (IMO) that is certain us that Amanda Knox accused an innocent man of murder, and yes, there were mitigating factors, but that's still a pretty big deal.

Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:33

Yes noblegiraffe I fully agree that someone might make an innocent man as a murderer when under pressure by the police. Srlf-evidently, Amanda Knox did. That doesn't make it right though, does it?

Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:34

Sorry for typos. I will try to type less quickly! Should say someone might name an innocent man.

Portofino · 02/07/2013 11:38

She didn't accuse him though. Under interrogation the police brought up the text he'd sent and used it to imply she must have met him that night and asked her to imagine what happened. The whole thing is so ridiculous it was ruled inadmissable in court. The police are to blame for Lumumba's arrest - not AK.

She was a young girl, in a foreign country being interrogated overnight by a huge group of police. She was not fluent in italian then.

MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 11:39

You're essentially saying that because she caved under immense pressure and named her boss (quickly retracted, I remind you again) that she deserves no sympathy for four years of her life lost or the continuing smear campaign, perpetuated by foamy-mouthed tabloid-reading dullards. All because she was there, her life has gone to shite.

OP posts:
Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:40

porto I am probably reaching the end if my limited knowledge of this case now but she was convicted of defamation. All of the mitigating factors cited on this thread would have been used by her defence team. She was still convicted.

Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:41

I'm saying I don't have much sympathy for women who claim their boss murdered their friend, no.

Portofino · 02/07/2013 11:41

And unfairly arrested or not, Patrick was let out relatively quickly. Yes, it must have been traumatic for him, but he has not suffered to the degree anyone else has.

Portofino · 02/07/2013 11:44

I give up on that one. I would have a look at noble's link tiger if I were you.

MarmaladeTwatkins · 02/07/2013 11:46

Well if you're going to be like a dog with a bone on that one, so be it.

A bit mental though.

OP posts:
Curioustiger · 02/07/2013 11:48

I did look Porto.