Insulting the justice

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Insulting the justice

CLOWN SHOW AT THE COURTHOUSE

Time to let her go

Murder party in Jean Paul Gaultier shirt Nothing has been more revealing about The Error that has been dominating this investigation as the testimony of the laundry man. On November 5th Raffaele brings him a shirt to be cleaned. It's an elegant Jean Paul Gaultier shirt he needs to wear at a degree party. But there's something strange (at least, in the reading of the soldiers of suspect), the shirt is not really dirty, it's just a bit rub. Then Raffaele brings it still on the crutch. Besides that Raffaele asks him to do it the day itself, and the two previous times he had gone there he didn't ask for any rush. Well, believe it or not, the police thought all this was suspicious and was revealing the hidden truth: he wears that shirt for the murder, he washes it himself, removing all the blood. Then he brings it to the laundryman to have it completely sterilized and any trace of Meredith's blood removed forever. Instead than getting rid of that shirt he keeps it for 4 days, then he does this dangerous operation: he walks in the street showing everybody the nailing piece of evidence on a crutch and he picks just the laundry next door to completely cancel Meredith's blood... Unbelievable how great they are at suspecting. They've been suspecting of absolutely everything. Their cellphones were off: it wasn't because they were sleeping but because they went to kill Meredith. There was smell of clean in the house: it wasn't because it was a clean house but because they canceled the evidence. He went to bring a shirt to the laundry: it's not because he wants to wear that shirt but because it's the shirt he wore during the murder. And so on. Mistakes like that may be done when nobody taught you the logic, when you are led only by bias and suspicion. And they were so convinced of the guiltiness of the shirt that they made forget the laundry man that Raffaele told him he needed it for a degree party. Just the good man, today, with the help of some questions, recovered that Raffaele's sentence from a removed drawer of his memory admitting that Yes, this thing of the degree party doesn't sound new to me... A pair at home, once again Nothing new from Jovanna Popovich, she goes to Raffaele at 20:40 to tell him she doesn't need a ride to the train station anymore. Jovanna, besides confirming Amanda and Raffaele's version confirms as well the cellphone's study, which placed Raffaele at his place at 20:42. There was Amanda too, obviously, and not exactly sharpening knives... Bleached bleach The bleach exits definitely the case. Yesterday, as we remember, a policeman with a wiser nose than the previous one defined the presumed smell of bleach as smell of clean, not of bleach. And today Rosa Fernandez confirmed that it was Lysoform. She did the cleaning on the 5th with it, the police went there next morning with Raffaele and realized what it was true: that some cleaning had just be done. What they wouldn't realize is that was not the murderer who had canceled Meredith's blood but Rosa who did her innocent job. It had already emerged that the two bottles, besides being almost unused, were an old purchase with a price out of date and almost faded by the time. Pulling the judge's legs But the insult to the justice came from the clown show of Marco Quintavalle, the store keeper. In the Sala degli Affreschi, were the justice is ruled or taught since 6 centuries this guy managed to pull the legs of a judge and a full jury. He spent one hour describing how Amanda went to his store in the morning of November 2, perfectly remembering the pitiful lesson he had learned of the color of her scarf, clothes and eyes... But later, about the end of his testimony, under the questions of Carlo Dalla Vedova, he admitted that: I'm not absolutely sure that can be her. The judge Massei couldn't accept that sudden nullification of his whole testimony and with the very last round of questions managed to have him to affirm again the opposite: but inside me I'm sure. The event speaks a lot about what idea the judge has of the case. It looks like he totally bought the prosecutors position since sometimes you may have the feeling that he seems to resist to elements running against it, as he did in this case. But what is unbelievable is to see a courthouse being made fun by a sandwich seller and his totally contradictory testimony. We had seen Judge Paolo Micheli's criteria of judgment of testimonies. He dismissed witnesses for much less. And probably he, Paolo the impartial, would have already kicked back this joker to slice prosciutto. His testimony was totally inconsistent. He maintains to have recalled on November 6, the day Amanda was arrested, that she was the girl who came to his store on November 2. He had to admit that the police went to question him on about November 15 and he didn't tell them anything. He had to admit that the police told him to call anytime he had anything to say but he never called them. But one year later he was convinced (he used this word) by his friend from the notorious Giornale dell'Umbria to finally remember that on that faraway day of November 2 2007 Amanda Knox went to his store... Not even a kid would believe this tomfoolery. Carlo questioned him also about his relation with the media and his exclusive interview to Porta a Porta and Marco repeated what he had told me, to have been disappointed by that interview. But he had to admit that for complaining he didn't call Porta a Porta, he called the director of Giornale dell'Umbria, revealing who was the organizer of that operation (as I had figured out at that time). By consequence Carlo's question was compulsory: he asked Marco if he had been payed. And he denied. It remains to explain what made him accept the risk to be punished (as by article 379 bis of penal code) for having violated the secretiveness of the deposition... Anyway, his testimony is maybe very important for his mentors, who have to sell newspapers and books for ingenuous readers. Not so for the trial because, after all, he just said he saw Amanda entering a store and he, the self-proclaimed genius of memory, doesn't remember what she bought. Here there's a difference to what he stated to me --that when Amanda showed up he was at the cash-register-- and what he said today. It seems that he studied better how to recite his ludicrous part because today he stated that he wasn't at the cash-register and that's why he doesn't know what she bought. Anyways, I don't really want to waste my time with this abhorrent character, I just have to remind that he said under oath I'm not absolutely sure that can be her and I hope for the sake of the justice that this sentence --which in fact nullifies all of his delirium-- has been transcript and will remain in the trial act. If not, there's still the TV record. MEREDITH'S MATTRESS STOLEN The rumor started to circulate this morning at the hearing. A journalist of Giornale dell'Umbrina went to read the registry upstairs and found out that --after Thursday break-in at the house, the second in a month-- Meredith's mattress is missing as well as Amanda's suitcase (the one with the cutlery), a knife and some pillows. The police doesn't confirms, the prosecutors don't confirm. An investigation is on and they can't speak. But Meredith's lawyer, Francesco Maresca, confirms. So it's true. And this tells us something even about the case. If these people are thieves, if these people are criminals we can see how many of them there are around that isolated cottage, how easy is to break into there and go make damages. And with a cottage surrounded with criminals, suspecting just Amanda and Raffaele has been really narrow-minded. If these people are megalomaniacs we see how easily a big media case strikes people's imagination and people can turn crazy, making up even false testimonies. If these people (or their senders) are satanists or fetishes nothing new, we knew how sick is our society. In the meanwhile better keep an eye on eBay, where you can never know if fetishes from a murder may be sold sooner or later...