Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#7

[Katody]

Yes, and if I am not mistaken, it was said that none of Filomena's dna was found in her own bedroom, which is very odd. Anyone know about this, and the above posted?

Very odd, it's obviously cleanup but why would Filomena remove all her DNA?

 

[SMK]

Very odd, it's obviously cleanup but why would Filomena remove all her DNA?

I didn't say it was clean up, did I? I took Mr. Halkides at his word: (as indeed I have to; I have no comprehension of any of the forensics). - Amanda was referenced so hers were found with luminol. Had the others been referenced, theirs would have been found "at the crime scene". It looks as though the luminol reacted to things other than blood. It was an inkling of this which made me call it "odd". I had already removed luminol traces, etc. from my list of "indicators of culpability" last night. Give me some credit, grrr. ETA: If anyone has a counter-theory or refutation of that, I will take it well under advisement.

 

[redheadedgal]

Prosecutor Crini mentioned it. The document of the negative controls was deposited with the court. The raw data was available on the machine. I don't know what else was the problem. Maybe Bongiorno will explain it later.
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...rosecutor_alessandro_crini_proposes_30_years/

Prosecutor Crini explained that all data was available, that the independent experts said they got all cooperation.

according to those tweets --which are to be taken as rumor and unconfirmed according to the rules thread-- crini (allegedly) also said the print of the knife on the sheet is compatible w/ the knife taken from RS's home... does anyone here really agree with this? (see overlay below)

imo, this alone demonstrates how deceptive and unsound things are from the prosecution's pov: twisting facts, mischaracterizing evidence etc.

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/album.php?album_id=43


(crini also --allegedly-- contradicts himself... more than once. first he says the prosecution has a duty to conjecture a motive, then he says "there is no futile motive". huh? he also --allegedly-- said there is no reason to figure out why the knife was carried from RS's home to the cottage and there is no premeditation. why on earth would they bring the knife to the cottage then? it's just pure nonsense.)

 

[SMK]

according to those tweets --which are to be taken as rumor and unconfirmed according to the rules thread-- crini (allegedly) also said the print of the knife on the sheet is compatible w/ the knife taken from RS's home... does anyone here really agree with this? (see overlay below)

imo, this alone demonstrates how deceptive and unsound things are from the prosecution's pov: twisting facts, mischaracterizing evidence etc.

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/album.php?album_id=43


(crini also --allegedly-- contradicts himself... more than once. first he says the prosecution has a duty to conjecture a motive, then he says there is "no futile motive". huh? he also --allegedly-- said there is no reason to figure why the knife was carried from RS to the cottage and there is no premeditation. why on earth would they bring the knife to the cottage then? it's just nonsense.)

BBM - "No futile motive" in the legal sense refers to : "For abject and/or futile motives" (art.61, sect.4); A futile motive would be an aggravating and not mitigating factor. If I kill you because you turned the tv up too loud, that is a futile motive. If I kill you because you destroyed my marriage, that is not. So the prosecution, the way I understand it from Crini, is saying there were profound motives at work: MORE than an unflushed toilet. This is my understanding of the term.

 

[aa9511]

Yes, you do have a very good point there.

But giving someone a key, asking them to rob someone: If such a scenario led to murder, I believe in the US you would be held very accountable, and receive a long sentence as an accessory to murder. (at this point, it would NOT be viewed as a prank, but as a deadly act of reckless homicide)-- Wouldn't you agree?

and perhaps with all the appeals they have in Italy, admitting to nothing is your best chance of acquittal? Especially with a PR campaign of innocence which is working, etc.?

I don't think it would be as long as murder charges. I think if you go and ask someone to kill someone for you, yes those would be murder charges, I believe. But if you ask them to rob, and they ultimately escalate it to murder, however that happened, I believe they would be ultimately responsible fo the murder. And you would just be respoinsible for the hiring-to-rob part. I think, but not sure.

I just don't see how they would go through all of this if all they did was ask Rudy to go play a prank on her, and he ended up raping and murdering her. Those are two very, very different things. And yet they're still on trial for murder?

 

[aa9511]

Or perhaps we are responding to a post about the phone call and giving our thoughts from the "otherside". Isn't that what a discussion is?

To insinuate that a "pro guilt person" is using it as a distraction is wrong. For one I replied a lot yesterday about the phone call but it started as a reply simply.

I do not like the lumping pro guilt people into a group in this way.
I do not have a dog in this fight so to speak.
I do not harbor ill will towards amanda Knox

I simply view the evidence differently then some is all and I enjoy the polite discussion from both views.

Thank you, Amen!

 

[whoanellie]

I can't remember if I asked this or not, (or actually, the post seems to have vanished) but I think it's unlikely that a group altercation would begin in the bedroom.

Was there any evidence in the kitchen or livingroom area that Knox, Guede, and Sollecito had been playing music, partying, drinking or smoking?

I've wondered the same thing. I don't think that there was any indication of a party or of a subsequent fight/struggle in the common areas.

 

[miley]

I read The Monster of Perugia by Waterbury last night.

He makes a compelling case about Guede, as lone wolf and as a sadistic killer. This is what makes me keep going back and re-checking and triple-checking all the red flags about Knox. I don't want to be misled by bad translations or exaggerations of any kind.

I would like to think that if Knox is in the hot water she is, that she at the very least had a peripheral role (if not a main one) and the idea that - as Waterbury sets forth - Guede was a serial killer in the making , if true, makes me ill. Because it would mean that he has pulled one over on everyone, and ruined 2 lives into the bargain.

Below is from the PDF of Monster of Perugia:

During the dark, cold evening of Thursday, Nov. 1, 2007, the sun
set at 05:05 PM. After dark Rudy Guede: a 20 year old. . . a known burglar, drug dealer, set out to rape, rob and kill Meredith Kercher.
Guede is wearing a jacket and carrying with him a pocket knife with a 3 ½
inch locking blade, a pair of leather gloves, a thin plastic card and some
condoms.

Guede had been watching the upstairs apartment occupied by four female college students: Amanda Knox, Meredith Kercher, Filomena
Romanelli and Laura Mezzetti, for quite some time. He made mental notes
of their habits as he planed to rape, murder and rob Meredith Kercher.

Guede associated with the college boys occupying the downstairs
apartment. From them he learned such things as: when the rent was due,
how the girls spent their time and who likely not home at certain times.
Guede knew Meredith would likely come home early as she normally does,
and the other three girls who have boy friends, would normally spend the
night with them, were not likely to come home until late, if at all. Guede
learned the college boys would be away on a trip for several days.
On the night of the crime, the conditions were perfect for Guede to rape,
murder and rob Meredith.​

I think RG had been watching the cottage, too. He even mentions in his diary going over there and no one being home.
F.Sfarzo said that one night, mid October, Giorgio, a friend of the guys downstairs, saw someone hiding in the garden shadows around 9:30 pm, evidently he was very bothered by it. About a week later, the exact same thing happened to Meredith (and she told Giacomo)

Massei report: If we grant that Rudy was the perpetrator of the burglaries committed at the (law) offices... and at the house of Tramontano, it must be observed that none of these men knew Rudy, and nor did the director of the Milan nursery on Via Plinio

The above isn't exactly true though. Rg was familiar with most of the break-in victims.. The Milan nursery owner believed Rg knew one of her employees. In the case of Mandu Diaz, Rg lived directly next door & she said they knew each other casually. And when Sfarzo interviewed Tremontano, he described Rg as a neighbor and knew him by sight. Actually, after Rg pulled out the knife, Tremontano told him not to be stupid because he knew who he was and he could tell the police.

So, I think RG had been watching all of them, making mental notes. Tremontano must have broken his routine, considering he was a bartender and worked nights. (unless Rg was after his girlfriend, Monika). And then, he probably thought everyone living in the cottage left town for the holidays. (unless, he was waiting for Mk)

I consider these credible witnesses - right after RG's photo was published on the news, they immediately came forward and contacted the police.

 

[otto]

What if Patrick did not have an alibi?

Although Knox admitted to her mother that she was a liar (probably nothing new to her mother), both her mother and she remained silent until the prosecutor's office independently proved that Patrick was innocent.

 

[lawstudent]

I don't think it would be as long as murder charges. I think if you go and ask someone to kill someone for you, yes those would be murder charges, I believe. But if you ask them to rob, and they ultimately escalate it to murder, however that happened, I believe they would be ultimately responsible fo the murder. And you would just be respoinsible for the hiring-to-rob part. I think, but not sure.

I just don't see how they would go through all of this if all they did was ask Rudy to go play a prank on her, and he ended up raping and murdering her. Those are two very, very different things. And yet they're still on trial for murder?

I doubt this is true of Italian law, but in the U.S. that could be conspiracy to commit a felony or something along those lines, which would then be felony murder. If you go in to a store to rob it with a friend and the friend kills someone and you had no idea he was that crazy, you can still be charged with murder, and many have.

 

[aa9511]

No reference DNA from Laura or Filomena were taken. No reference footprints from Laura or Filomena were taken. Meredith shared a bathroom with Amanda, not with Laura or Filomena. The FP were obviously focused on blood. If Rudy had cleaned up in the large bathroom, one might find mixed DNA from Laura and/or Filomena (if their reference profiles were taken). One of the samples from Filomena's room has some extra alleles (Rep. 176 or 177); it is possible that Filomena is the donor.

The footprints in the hall do not have distinguishing marks and the luminol was overapplied, leading to dilation; therefore, I do not see how one can claim that the footprints must come from any one woman, Amanda or someone else. At least one of the footprints in Amanda's room (Rep. 180) has no mark where Amanda's second toe is, but it has a mark below it. If this is not Amanda's footprint, then the whole premise that it is blood that is reacting with luminol is called into question.

Ok, I get your point about the bathroom, Amanda and Meredith sharing that one. Filomena's room....isn't that where Amanda/Meredith mixed DNA is? So it already has Amanda's DNA. What are the chances that out of all the Filomena DNA that should have been int here, Meredith's DNA mixed in with Amanda's in her room. And how did Meredith's DNA even get into that room, without someone bringing it in, and furthermore then mixing it in with Amanda's. Quite a stretch.


Re: the footprints. Someone's footprints are there, and they are not Rudy's. Can we agree that those are from someone else? So 2 people walking in hallway, you are saying one with blood. Second is "undecided." That "undecided," IMO, cannot be anything other than blood. Because if it's not blood, that means other roommates' footprints should have also shown - that includes Meredith, Amanda, Laura, and Filomena. So there should have been footprints all over. If it was from bleach from the shower, that bleach would have rinsed off with the shower. Plus the feet themselves would be rinsed off (that's the point of showering). And still, if one stttreeetches and says maybe there was a bit of bleach still left after all that water ran over it, still the bathmat would have absorbed the bleach from her feet when she did her bathmat boogie. And if no bathmat boogie, she would have still passed over the bathmat on her way out of the bathroom, and the supposed bleach would have gotten absorbed by the mat. If it was from bleach other than the shower, it would have been from the floor. If it was from the floor, it would have disintegrated so it wouldn't be all over the entire foot to leave a clear footprint, if it even showed up on the foot at all. If it was bleach from someone just stood in some bleach just for the fun of it, that person should probably be jailed anyway

So, the footprint is from blood. And if it's blood, it's obviously Meredith's blood, I don't care what people say, you cannot have someone who "bled to death" in a house, and claim the blood is from someone else. That doesn't fly, unless one lives in an alternate universe.

So it's Meredith's blood. A footprint from someone stepping on Meredith's blood. You say it's not Amanda's footprint. Then whose is it? It's not Rudy's.

 

[Yellow]

:floorlaugh:

It is not speculation that a knife or knives was involved in the murder. Am I missing something?

Mystery knife held by RG? Well, someone had a knife. Even RG as lone wolf had a knife. Again, am I missing something?

I think maybe picturing the knife at Raffaelo's house as THE murder knife is where it's hindering the ability to see the picture as a whole. If I'm reading the posts right, it leads me to believe you are dismissing AK and RS as being involved because, in your opinion, the knife doesn't "match up."

But we know there was at least one knife used in the murder.

Does that mean we can find excuses for RG and take him out of the picture, too, because there wasn't a knife found connecting him to the murder?

Somebody there had a knife. If RG as a lone wolf, means he brought a knife with him. I don't think it's out of the realm, to put it mildly, to imagine someone had a knife with them. Or are we supposed to ignore that, too? Kind of hard to ignore that in this case.

I'm confused now.

Go back to your original post and you will see what i mean. What I mean is you had a whole scenario laid out, with hypothetical quotes and everything of what was said between the parties. As you admit, it was all speculation. That is the problem, it is all speculation there was this heated argument that escalated into murder. No evidence of any hostility pre murder, all you have is evidence of normal dormmate issues. And even there you merely have MK telling someone AK did not flush the toilet right. There is no evidence of anything else, no evidence of any hatred or even dislike.

And there is no evidence the 3 were together at any point in time let alone the time of the murder

This has nothing to do w the knife. It has to do with imagining scenarios with quotes and everything that have no basis in the evidence.

The scenario you posed I believe did not even have the knife in AK hand, which if you follow what the state said, AK had to be at least one of the stabbers since they claim her DNA was on the murder weapon.

Imo, The knife they found in the drawer is not the murder weapon. Why no blood? Why not teaming in MK DNA? We know for a fact that there is a missing knife that matches the cuts and matches the print of the bloody knife. IMO that was RG's knife.

State makes themselves look silly by focusing on losing points instead of making this into a circumstantial case bases on the scant evidence they have.

 

[aa9511]

So glad I'm not the only one! :floorlaugh:

Amber and SighSister....:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:. Thanks for the laugh!

OT - I don't know what I'm gonna do since the next part isn't televised....it will be agony!! And no, tweets are not the same.

 

[Yellow]

Ok, I was thinking of this Amanda DNA thing.

Now, the argument is well, Amanda's DNA just happened to be in those exact spots that they collected, because well, her DNA was all over place because she lived there.

Then why weren't Laura or Filomena's DNA found in some samples? They lived there, too. In at least a few of them, shouldn't have their DNA be there, too, especially in Filomena's own room? I know their DNA supposedly wasn't taken, but even so, those samples should have then been "unidentified." Someone's DNA is there, but that person is not identifiable. Instead, it was Amanda's DNA. How does Amanda's DNA show up in an "unidentifiable person's" DNA? For all the numerous complicated DNA analysis I have seen on here, I don't think I've heard this simple question be acknowledged since I've been on here.

No one has ever seemed to take this simple fact into consideration, as far as I've seen from the arguments.

It's always, Amanda's DNA has a reason to be there (other than she was there during the murder).

All 4 roomates lived there. If the theory that DNA is everywhere is correct, the other roomates (or 3 of them) should have been equally represented in the house, DNA-wise. I'm leaving Meredith out because her DNA was already in almost everything due to the blood, so we couldn't have determined whether some of her DNA was in the house from the "everywhere' theory or not.

Same goes with the luminol footprints. f the Luminol supposedly reacted to something other than blood, the other 3 roomates' footprints did not show up under Luminol, even though they lived there, too. Only Amanda's.

I was thinking of this when I was just thinking about this whole issue, thinking I wish there was a control house somewhere where they could do experiments on how the occupants' DNA is found.

THen I thought.....wait, there are already controls built into this house.....Laura and Filomena.

They did not control testing of random areas of the floor. It could very well be they would have found other roommates DNA if they did this procedure like they should have

Second reason,maybe only AK ran around barefoot. Not everyone considers it clean to run w wet feet on a cold floor. Everyone else could have simply worn flip flops or socks. Americans sometimes have different styles than Europeans. Like you can always spot an American in Europe bc Americans wear shorts. I have no idea if Europeans have different feet wearing habits than Americans.

Combined w the fact that they did not DNA test control areas, we have no idea what was on that floor. I think they only DNA tested the stains or areas hitting w luminol. They did not test other things.

 

[aa9511]

I doubt this is true of Italian law, but in the U.S. that could be conspiracy to commit a felony or something along those lines, which would then be felony murder. If you go in to a store to rob it with a friend and the friend kills someone and you had no idea he was that crazy, you can still be charged with murder, and many have.

To give them the benefit of the doubt, they could have I guess asked their lawyers. I mean, not admitted to the lawyers anything, but maybe just asked them a hypothetical, thus not putting any burdern on their lawyers, since it was a hypothetical.

I dunno, just thinkin'.

 

[Yellow]

Ok, I get your point about the bathroom, Amanda and Meredith sharing that one. Filomena's room....isn't that where Amanda/Meredith mixed DNA is? So it already has Amanda's DNA. What are the chances that out of all the Filomena DNA that should have been int here, Meredith's DNA mixed in with Amanda's in her room. And how did Meredith's DNA even get into that room, without someone bringing it in, and furthermore then mixing it in with Amanda's. Quite a stretch.


Re: the footprints. Someone's footprints are there, and they are not Rudy's. Can we agree that those are from someone else? So 2 people walking in hallway, you are saying one with blood. Second is "undecided." That "undecided," IMO, cannot be anything other than blood. Because if it's not blood, that means other roommates' footprints should have also shown - that includes Meredith, Amanda, Laura, and Filomena. So there should have been footprints all over. If it was from bleach from the shower, that bleach would have rinsed off with the shower. If it was from bleach other than the shower, it would have been from the floor. If it was from the floor, it would have disintegrated so it wouldn't be all over the entire foot to leave a clear footprint, if it even showed up on the foot at all. If it was bleach from someone just stood in some bleach just for the fun of it, that person should probably be jailed anyway

So, the footprint is from blood. And if it's blood, it's obviously Meredith's blood, I don't care what people say, you cannot have someone who "bled to death" in a house, and claim the blood is from someone else. That doesn't fly, unless one lives in an alternate universe.

So it's Meredith's blood. A footprint from someone stepping on Meredith's blood. You say it's not Amanda's footprint. Then whose is it? It's not Rudy's.

If it was MK blood, why not test positive in secondary tests? And not even test positive for MK DNA? Remember this is not some tiny sample. These are suppose to be whole footsteps teaming in MK blood, yet the tests show no blood and no Mk DNA! They show AK DNA so it is not the test themselves, rather it suggests no MK DNA was there. and in none of them, not just one.

In one of your earlier posts, you mentioned something about RG dripping blood or carrying bloody stuff. He easily could have carried something bloody, like the knife, went into F's room to maybe think about taking something and the blood fell on a pre-existing AK footprint

Or alternatively, AK tracked MK blood from stepping on bloody footmat, her wet foot undried the blood and she went prancing around to make the mixed print

Finally, the least likely scenario, though still possible was that both Mk and AK stuff were deposited there pre murder in totally separate and innocent actions. Since the rest of the room did not have control samples, we have no clear on whether we would find similiar mixed DNA profiles w other roommates. They only tested the stains and the luminol. There could be mixed DNA all over the place, as it would be common if people walked around barefoot.

 

[aa9511]

:floorlaugh:

Go back to your original post and you will see what i mean. What I mean is you had a whole scenario laid out, with hypothetical quotes and everything of what was said between the parties. As you admit, it was all speculation. That is the problem, it is all speculation there was this heated argument that escalated into murder. No evidence of any hostility pre murder, all you have is evidence of normal dormmate issues. And even there you merely have MK telling someone AK did not flush the toilet right. There is no evidence of anything else, no evidence of any hatred or even dislike.

And there is no evidence the 3 were together at any point in time let alone the time of the murder

This has nothing to do w the knife. It has to do with imagining scenarios with quotes and everything that have no basis in the evidence.

The scenario you posed I believe did not even have the knife in AK hand, which if you follow what the state said, AK had to be at least one of the stabbers since they claim her DNA was on the murder weapon.

Imo, The knife they found in the drawer is not the murder weapon. Why no blood? Why not teaming in MK DNA? We know for a fact that there is a missing knife that matches the cuts and matches the print of the bloody knife. IMO that was RG's knife.

State makes themselves look silly by focusing on losing points instead of making this into a circumstantial case bases on the scant evidence they have.

Ah, I see now. You make good points. Yes, it is difficult to grasp what could have taken place. And it is easier to imagine a lone, crazy Rudy. I get that, I really do. You know what, if RS and Amanda really are guilty, it's precisely what you said above that it going to get them off the hook. If they're guilty, they better be thanking their lucky stars they didn't have a criminal history and that they were college students, and yes, also White that has helped them a lot. And like you said, not having a history with Meredith. All those things are going to be what gets them off the hook, if they do get off.

Not "fake" Luminol prints. Not "forced accusation." Not some laptop technicality. Not "everywhere DNA." Not Luca. Not Edda. Not Postal Police/cabinieri arrival confusion. Not bathmat boogie. Not "not realizing" importance of things like broken window. Not lab technicalities. Not sloppy technicians. Not inexperienced collectors. Not crook prosecutors. Not giving no controls/not followed "standard international lab procedures." Not cooking fish. Not mopping up water spill. Not sleeping till 10am. Not, did I say "forced accusation" already? yes I did. Etc.etc..

It will be none of the above which gets them off. It will be precisely what you said in your post that gets them off.

 

[Yellow]

Ah, I see now. You make good points. Yes, it is difficult to grasp what could have taken place. And it is easier to imagine a lone, crazy Rudy. I get that, I really do. You know what, if RS and Amanda really are guilty, it's precisely what you said above that it going to get them off the hook. If they're guilty, they better be thanking their lucky stars they didn't have a criminal history and that they were college students, and yes, also White that has helped them a lot. And like you said, not having a history with Meredith. All those things are going to be what gets them off the hook, if they do get off.

Not "fake" Luminol prints. Not "forced accusation." Not some laptop technicality. Not "everywhere DNA." Not Luca. Not Edda. Not Postal Police/cabinieri arrival confusion. Not bathmat boogie. Not "not realizing" importance of things like broken window. Not lab technicalities. Not sloppy technicians. Not inexperienced collectors. Not crook prosecutors. Not giving no controls/not followed "standard international lab procedures." Not cooking fish. Not mopping up water spill. Not sleeping till 10am. Not, did I say "forced accusation" already? yes I did. Etc.etc..

It will be none of the above which gets them off. It will be precisely what you said in your post that gets them off.

I think they get off bc there is a reasonable alternative scenario based in the evidence that RG is lone wolf, and they have alot of support bc the DNA evidence was discredited by independent experts. If they did not have the DNA evidence being discredited by intl standards, it would be a stronger case for guilt.

Also if they connected them to the murder room w DNA evidence, being white or college students would be of no help to them. It's the lack of evidence tying them to the room and murder weapon that gets them off, not merely being white or College students. And if you add to that you have no evidence connecting the three nor do you have evidence of past animosity, even a curcumstantial case comes falling down.

The circumstantial case requires too many assumptions and too make inferences to stand on its own without either having unrebuttable scientific proof or a strong motive to back it. You probably need both in a case w so many assumptions but you at least need one or the other. Here you don't have either the forensic link or the motive.

 

[otto]

It's so easy to get sucked into the minutia of footprints in the bedroom, even if they were wiped away after 12 hours.

Before and after photos are intended to convince peope that the prosecution is incompetent. The photos are intended to demonstate that the proseuction OOPS lost the footprints. What the heck is behind that rumor? Anyways, mayby it was procedural to clean up the footprints and maybe bloody footprints deteriorate over time.

If Mr Lumumba had not been independently alibied, what would have happened? Amanda Knox and Edda Mellas, her mother, remained silent about Knox's admission on November 10 (eight days after the false accusations against Mr Lumumba and arrest) that she lied about Mr Lumumba. Her letters of November 6 and 7 stand behind, and claim she is not lying, regarding the false accusation against Mr Lumumba.

 

[MichaelSmith]

It's so easy to get sucked into the minutia of footprints in the bedroom, even if they were wiped away after 12 hours.

Before and after photos are intended to convince peope that the prosecution is incompetent. The photos are intended to demonstate that the proseuction OOPS lost the footprints. What the heck is behind that rumor? Anyways, mayby it was procedural to clean up the footprints and maybe bloody footprints deteriorate over time.

If Mr Lumumba had not been independently alibied, what would have happened? Amanda Knox and Edda Mellas, her mother, remained silent about Knox's admission on November 10 (eight days after the false accusations against Mr Lumumba and arrest) that she lied about Mr Lumumba. Her letters of November 6 and 7 stand behind, and claim she is not lying, regarding the false accusation against Mr Lumumba.

If this hadn't of been high profile with the media watching, Lumumba could have been a death in custody case.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Lumumba-reveals-framed-Merediths-murder.html

They were wearing normal clothes and carrying guns," he says. "I thought it must be some sort of armed gang about to kill me. I was terrified.

"They hit me over the head and yelled 'dirty black'. Then they put handcuffs on me and shoved me out of the door, as Aleksandra pulled Davide away, screaming."

He was greeted outside by a convoy of seven police cars, sirens blazing, and driven to Perugia's police station, where he was subjected to a ten-hour interrogation.

"I was questioned by five men and women, some of whom punched and kicked me," he claims. "They forced me on my knees against the wall and said I should be in America where I would be given the electric chair for my crime. All they kept saying was, 'You did it, you did it.'