British tabloid interviews Amanda Knox prosecutor, gets "explosive new evidence"

[pnwmom]

The Sun will probably be next on Mignini's list of defamation lawsuits. (He's already sued several other journalists covering this case.) I assume the SUN recorded their interview with him.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3592844/THE-Suns-probe-into-Amanda-Knox-case-reveals-evidence-that-may-undermine-conviction.html

1. The false confession
A CONFESSION said to have been dragged out of Knox after nearly 52 hours of intense police interrogation was "half fact, half fiction", Italian prosecutor Giuliano Mignini has admitted to The Sun.
He even said he chose to go with the parts of the testimony that suited his case.
The Sun has also discovered that both the police and prosecutor failed to follow strict Italian legal rules.
They require cops to record all interviews with suspects, to provide non-Italian speakers with a translator and to have a lawyer present. Knox was arrested just a few weeks after she had arrived in Italy and could not speak Italian.


According to the article, Mignini also offered up an entirely new theory of the case to explain why there was no evidence of Amanda at the crime scene: he said that she could have directed the crime from outside of the room! (As opposed to actually wielding the knife herself, which is what she was accused of.)

Finally, he asked the SUN reporter that the details of the interview remain "in his office." Right. He must be used to that sort of treatment.

[DevonRex]

1. Interesting.

That case has always bothered me.

[pnwmom]

2. Me, too. There will be another appeals hearing tomorrow.

But the Court-appointed independent investigators have already asked for a 40 day extension with regard to the DNA evidence, which means (because of the Court's summer calendar) that the case probably won't be decided until fall. Knox and Sollecito have already been in prison for 3.5 years. Half of Italian criminal cases are overturned on the first appeal, and more with the second appeal. So, statistically speaking, there is a better than even chance that Amanda and Raffaele will be found "not guilty" after spending almost 4 years in prison.

The key evidence they're awaiting now? The "raw" data files for the DNA evidence -- the same type of files which eventually freed the Duke lacrosse students. The judge in the original trial ruled that they were unnecessary, even though all the DNA experts said that reviewing them was standard procedure. The new judge in the appeals trial has instructed the police lab to provide this data but, so far, the police lab has been stonewalling. Last I heard, the new judge had repeated his order to hand the data over. Meanwhile, Knox and Sollecito sit in prison.

[davidpdx]

3. Thanks for posting this

I too have been following this case for a few years.

[pnwmom]

4. It's hard to believe it's gone on this long. n/t

[davidpdx]

10. No kidding

It's a pretty divisive issue too. The Americans believing she is innocent and British believing she is guilty.

[CTyankee]

5. I still believe she is innocent. That is all I can say...

[pnwmom]

6. This SUN article actually supports that belief.

I'm curious about whether this reporter will be added to the long list of defamation defendants.

[CTyankee]

7. Something is really wrong here, IMO. I don't see motive or any kind of past history

that would point to this. It just feels "off" to me. Am I just weird?

[pnwmom]

9. You're not weird unless being logical and rational is weird.

The idea that a conscientious, hard-working high school student and college student suddenly smoked a little hash and morphed into a sex-crazed murderer is what's weird.

The idea that you could be part of a three-way murder, actually wielding the knife, and not leave any trace of your DNA or fingerprints at the bloody murder scene is what's weird.

The idea that you could somehow wash away all your own DNA, and all but a tiny fragment that might have been your boyfriends; and remove all your own fingerprints, and your boyfriend's fingerprints, while leaving only the DNA and fingerprints of your new burglar/sex/murderer/pal -- is what's weird.

The idea that you could still be in prison after 3.5 years, without your defense experts - or even the Court appointed independent investigators - being able to examine the raw DNA files that helped to convict you is what's weird.

The idea that the prosecution's star witness against you is a homeless self-acknowledged heroin addict, who amazingly -- through his keen powers of observation - has helped the police solve two other unrelated murder cases is what's weird.

And this new idea of Mignini's, that Amanda could have stood outside the room, shouting rape/murder instructions while her partners-in-crime did the dirty deed, is beyond weird. This guy is certifiable.

[RandomThoughts]

11. It makes sense if you add the comment.

When was the last time a million dollar paid economist was held prosecuted for rape or murder.


Sounds more like they trying to close a case, becuase someone they don't want to prosecute did it. But that is just a guess.

[DevonRex]

8. So do I. And I have professional experience

that leads me to that opinion.