Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Patrick Lumumba were arrested in Perugia Italy, on November 6th. 2007.
The police held a press conference stating that they had evidence that all three killed Meredith because she refused to participate in a sex game. They boasted that the case was solid. They were even bold enough to announce, "case closed."
The problem was, Patrick Lumumba had an unshakable alibi. There was no evidence at all linking him to the murder. He was released.
As the investigation progressed, investigators discovered a bloody handprint at the crime scene. Fingerprints taken from the handprint led the police to an African man, Rudy Guede. Guede left his handprint in Meredith's blood, on a pillow at the crime scene. His DNA was found on and inside Meredith's body. He also left his DNA on Meredith's purse. His DNA was also linked to feces left in the toilet.
Rudy Guede had fled to Germany and was extradited back to Italy. The evidence against Rudy Guede was overwhelming.
At this time the authorities led by prosecutor Mignini should have realized their mistake. The murder wasn't a group sex game gone wrong. Rudy Guede attacked and murdered Meredith Kercher. He acted alone.
The authorities refused to admit their mistake. They simply pulled Patrick Lumumba out of their fantasy and plugged in Rudy Guede. The prosecution pushed forward to prove that Meredith was murdered by this "revised" trio in a sex game gone wrong.
Rudy Guede chose a fast-track trial. Because he chose the fast-track trial, he was tried separately from Amanda and Raffaele.Guede was found guilty of murdering Meredith Kercher. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison. His conviction was later confirmed on appeal. His sentence was reduced to 16 years.
Here is a summary of the evidence presented by the prosecution at the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.
1. Kitchen knife
The knife was a common kitchen knife. The knife was retrieved from the kitchen of Raffaele Sollecito. The knife was chosen from the drawer because it looked clean. No other knives were taken to be tested. Was this an extraordinary case of good luck by the detectives or was this knife not the murder weapon after all?
The prosecution claimed that Amanda's DNA was on the handle and Meredith's DNA was on the blade.
When the knife was tested, Amanda's DNA was found on the handle. This was expected because Amanda often prepared meals and Raffaele's apartment. She used the knife for cooking. A sample was taken from the knife blade and was tested for blood. The result was negative. There was no blood on the knife. This needs to be repeated, THERE WAS NO BLOOD ON THE KNIFE.
What was left of the sample from the blade was tested for DNA. The results were negative.There was no DNA on the blade. This is when all guidelines for testing DNA were thrown out the window. The machine parameters were over-ridden. The tests kept coming back "too low." Then machine parameters were pushed far past the level of reliability finally producing the result they needed. Keep in mind, the test was done in a lab using large amounts of Meredith's DNA. No negative controls were used. The result was extremely low, measuring in trillionths of a gram of DNA. The procedures used to get the result they needed were deeply flawed. The DNA found on the knife came from the lab. The knife had no DNA from Meredith Kercher on the blade when it arrived for testing. The DNA sample was so small that only one test could be performed. No additional testing will ever be available.
2. Bra clasp
The prosecution used the bra clasp to show proof that Raffaele was in the room at the time of the murder. Raffaele's DNA was found on the clasp along with the DNA of at least four other people. After viewing the video showing the discovery of the bra clasp, it is amazing that it was even allowed to be entered as evidence. The clasp was not discovered until 47 days had passed. The clasp is seen in several different locations on the floor. The investigators made a mess of the room in previous searches for evidence. How they missed a piece of Meredith's bra the first time around is beyond belief. It leads to speculation that the clasp was later planted at the scene. But that is simply speculation so I will dismiss that theory. In the 47 days that the clasp was on the floor it was moved around the room and ended up under a dirty rug. Keep in mind that this clasp also had cloth attached to it from the bra. This cloth collected dust for 47 days. Raffaele was at the apartment on several occasions. Finding his DNA in the apartment would be no surprise. So in conclusion, the bra clasp tested positive for the DNA of Raffaele and most likely several other people that visited the apartment. The clasp proves nothing.
3. Footprints and shoe prints
During the trial assistant prosecutor Manuela Comodi, presented the footprint and shoe print evidence to the court. As expected, her job was to defend the police work of police forensic biologist Patrizia Stefanoni. She claimed that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's footprints made in blood were found on the floor.
Comodi said: "At the scene of the crime there is a footprint made in blood on the bathmat and Knox and Sollecito's footprints made in blood on the floor, and these were supposedly made at some different time because they stepped in bleach or rust or fruit juice? It's up to you to decide."
You decide?? It's laughable that the prosecutor would be so callous about something so important. How about this, Ms. Comodi, why not show proof that the footprints were made in blood? The truth is, the footprints were never proven to be made in blood. The footprints were detected with luminol. Luminol is an investigative tool that can help investigators find blood that has been cleaned up. When applied, luminol glows for a few seconds when it reacts with blood. Luminol also reacts with many other things. Luminol reacts with various household cleaners, different types of soil, rust in tap water, and many other substances. When luminol glows, the area can then be tested to see if it is indeed blood.
Patrizia Stefanoni claimed these stains were never tested for blood, however in July 2009, Stefanoni's notes confirmed the stains were tested with tetramethylbenzidine which is extremely sensitive for blood. All of the stains detected with luminol tested negative for blood.
These stains were also swabbed and tested for DNA. None of them tested positive for Meredith's DNA. Let me repeat that,
None of the footprints detected with luminol tested positive for Meredith's DNA.
With this information available to the prosecution, how could they possibly proceed with their accusation that the prints were made in Meredith's blood?
Did these footprints really have anything to do with this murder?
4. Mixed DNA, not mixed blood
Investigators found the mixed DNA of Meredith and Amanda in a total of six samples among dozens that were taken. Three of these samples were from the bathroom that was shared by Amanda and Meredith. The other two housemates used a different bathroom. Mixed DNA was also found in a latent shoe print in the hallway. A swab from Filomena's room revealed Meredith's DNA with what appears to be a very weak profile for Amanda.
All of the mixed DNA samples from the bathroom were visible bloodstains. Most likely they were composed of Meredith's blood mixed with an organic residue containing Amanda's DNA. No test was performed to determine if any of these samples contained the blood of both Meredith and Amanda, and there is no evidence that any of them did.
The other three mixed DNA samples were taken from latent stains revealed with luminol. As mentioned in the footprints and shoe prints section above, Patrizia Stefanoni claimed these stains were never tested for blood, however in July 2009, Stefanoni's notes confirmed the stains were tested with tetramethylbenzidine which is extremely sensitive for blood. All of the stains detected with luminol tested negative for blood.
The prosecutor has tried to insinuate that these findings are incriminating. The most plausible explanation is that the mixed DNA is simply a result of cohabitation. As an example for the sake of comparison, investigators used luminol in Raffaele's apartment and found a latent stain with the mixed DNA of him and Amanda. Here is an example that you can relate to in your own home. If you cut your finger and your blood lands on a sink in a bathroom shared by another person in your house, you will get the exact same result. Your DNA will be mixed with the DNA from the other person that also used the bathroom. All it means is that two people have been sharing the same space.
The blood samples in the bathroom were not collected properly. Gioia Brocci, photographic agent of the Questura of Perugia, used the collection swabs like cleaning rags. She wiped large surface areas and also collected from multiple surfaces with one single swab. She also never changed her gloves. Brocci actually advanced the mixing process right on her swabs.
5. Behavior
Guilt was decided very quickly by the investigators based on the behavior of Amanda Knox. The decision was made just a few days after the murder of Meredith Kercher. Head investigator Edgardo Giobbi determined, in his mind, the guilt of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito before he had even begun to collect or analyze any actual evidence.
Edgardo Giobbi boasted: “We were able to establish guilt by closely observing the suspect's psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We don't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method has enabled us to get to the guilty parties in a very quick time."
This decision of guilt was achieved before Edgardo Giobbi had even heard of Rudy Guede.
Giobbi also stated that his suspicions were raised just hours after the murder, when he saw Amanda at the crime scene, swivel her hips as she put on a pair of shoe covers.
The behavior of Amanda Knox was brought up in many other occasions throughout the trial. This occurred not only in the courtroom but continued in the media. This is discussed here, Lies and Misinformation and here, Amanda Knox.
6. Witnesses
Antonio Curatolo was considered the prosecution's "super witness" but he turned out to be an embarrassment. A group of Meredith's friends from the UK testified. The most notable part of their testimony isn't what they said, it's what they didn't say. This list shows the key witnesses for the prosecution.
1. Hekuran Kokomani:
An Albanian man, Hekuran Kokomani, a man with drug and alcohol problems testified that he saw the three suspects together on the night of the murder. He's the only person in the world who claims he saw Amanda, Raffaele and Rudy together. He was supposed to be the prosecution's "super witness." He described Amanda as a girl with gaps in her teeth and he somehow knew that that she had an Italian uncle. Of course both of these statements are completely false. The Defense team discredited this witness on cross-examination.
2. Antonio Curatolo:
Antonio Curatolo, a homeless man who sleeps in Piazza Grimana, completely backfired for the prosecution. He practically provided an alibi for the suspects. He said Amanda and Raffaele were chattering from about 9:30 pm to right before midnight on the basketball court near the cottage. They were supposedly "casing" it after the murder, prosecutors contend. The suspects claim they never left Raffaele's apartment. The time frame given by the witness, actually would provide an alibi for Amanda and Raffaele. Not exactly what the prosection was aiming for.
3. Nara Capezzali:
A woman named Nara who lives in a nearby apartment claims to have heard a scream followed by the footsteps of more than one person outside in the street. There is no way that Nara heard a scream come from Meredith's room. This distance was simply too far.
The scream was allegedly so "blood curdling" that Nara did not bother to look at the time or call the police. Nara may have had good intentions. She was simply trying to help the police after all. Maybe she was coached just a little bit. Science proves that she didn't hear a scream. Someone convinced her that she did. Can we still look at Nara as a credible witness? The logical answer is no. Maybe she heard footsteps, maybe not. We will never really know. Nara simply isn't reliable.
4. Marco Quintavalle:
Marco Quintavalle is a store owner that testified that he saw Amanda in his store the morning after the murder. Quintavalle claimed Amanda was in the store and she was showing an urgency to buy something in the cleaning section but left without buying anything. Investigators checked Quintavalle's roll of tickets and found no bleach detergent was purchased. Yet the court concluded Amanda purchased bleach anyway. No bleach receipt was ever produced. In fact, there was already bleach at the cottage.
The court inexplicably ignored the testimony of Inspector Orestes Volturno who subsequently questioned Quintavalle after the initial questioning that happened within a day or so of the murder. Volturno's service record shows he questioned Quintavalle on November 19, 2007. The record makes it clear he was shown photos of Amanda and Raffaele and he said they had been to his store two or so times but not on November 2nd. and they were always together. The record shows Volturno went with officer Stephen Gubbiotti. The record indicates that they spoke with Quintavalle and then his two employees. On March 21, 2009 Volturno testifies to the same. Volturno showed Quintavalle pictures of Amanda and Raffaele and Quintavalle denied she was in his store on November 2, 2007.
Quintavalle only came forward almost a year later following contact with a reporter which ended up getting him on TV. Quintavalle claims Amanda was wearing a cap and scarf and she wore a grey jacket. Quintavalle states that he only saw the side of Amanda's face. Then he claims it was Amanda's blue eyes that he remembers despite earlier saying he never saw the front of her face. No grey coat was ever found to be part of Amanda's clothing and it doesn't match anything anyone else ever saw. Ana Marina Chiriboga who worked in the store was asked in October, 2008 if she had seen Amanda on November 2, 2007 and she said no which she repeated in court on June 26, 2009.
5. Meredith's friends from the UK:
The prosecutor went to a lot of trouble and expense to bring in witnesses who made unfavorable comments about Amanda. These witnesses included a number of Meredith's friends from the UK as well as Amanda's Italian housemates. They described Amanda as being lax in housekeeping, and they said her behavior after the murder came across as insensitive. The most notable part of their testimony isn't what they said, it's what they didn't say.
None of these witnesses ever heard Amanda say anything negative to or about Meredith. There was no testimony mentioning Amanda ever acting angry, showing rage or even raising her voice to anyone at anytime. None of the witnesses were intimidated by Amanda and there was no testimony stating that Amanda ever attempted to intimidate anyone in their presence. Amanda never stole anything from anyone, never lied to anyone, never intimidated anyone, and never yelled at anyone. In fact there was no testimony that Amanda even raised her voice slightly to anyone at anytime.
Not one witness described any behavior that could possibly be considered hostile or aggressive, much less violent.
One aspect of the character witness testimony is disturbing to me. The testimony that Meredith's friends provided was almost identical. It sounded as if they were all one person. There is no definitive proof of this of course, but it sure seams that these character witnesses were very well coached.
7. The break in
The prosecution stated that Amanda and Raffaele staged the break in to frame Rudy Guede. The court was told that Amanda and Raffaele broke the window in Filomena's room and ransacked the room to make the homicide look like a botched robbery attempt. Filomena went into her room several times on November 2nd, before the discovery of Meredith's body. She told the police that she saw glass on top of her clothing from the broken window.
The prosecution used her statement to make the case that the room was ransacked before the window was broken. They stated that the clothes were thrown around and then the window was broken. The prosecution stated that the window was broken from the inside in an attempt to make it look like someone broke in.
There are many problems with this basic assumption. Many more factors come into play. It is easy to say, glass was on top of the clothes, case closed. But it simply doesn't work that way. Has anyone thought that it is very possible that the room was not tidy? It is likely that the clothes were on the floor to begin with. It is also safe to say that glass would have been on the furniture and on the bed spread in the room. Keep in mind, the room is very small.
The evidence does not support the assumption that the room was intentionally ransacked to make the room appear to be burglarized. There were clear signs that the room was a mess from the start. The clothes on the floor were not thrown there to stage a break in. The clothes on the floor appear to be a pile of dirty clothes. It is likely that these clothes were already on the floor when Rudy broke the window.
Rudy Guede broke the window so he could release the latch and open the window. After he entered the cottage, he most likely searched the room looking for money. It would be speculation to say what he was searching for. During his search, it would be reasonable to say that he was moving things around in the small room. The glass would have been free to land anywhere. He would have most likely left the room in disarray.
Filomena was in her room several times in the morning following Meredith's murder looking for her belongings. When she was searching her room, she likely would have knocked some of the glass off of the table or the bed onto the floor or anywhere else for that matter.
Investigators simply did not properly investigate this room. They never checked to see if there was glass under the clothes. They never photographed any glass on top of the clothes. There are two places on the floor where it appears that the clothes have been stepped on. There were no tests done at all on these areas. Photographic evidence shows that there is dust on the clothes. This dust likely came from the outside brick wall. The evidence suggests that the killer climbed up the wall and stepped into the room onto the clothes. Due to the lack of investigation, we will never know exactly what happened.
There is photographic evidence showing that the rock was thrown from outside the cottage. The outside shutters were open. Filomena stated that she did not remember if she closed the shutters. The inside shutters were pushed closed but not latched.
The rock broke the glass and hit the inside shutter causing damage to the wood. The rock then fell downward toward the floor catching the edge of a glossy black paper shopping bag. The rock knocked the bag over and came to rest on the tile floor on the edge of the bag. The photographs clearly show dust from the rock and small pieces of the rock that had broken free caused by the impact of the rock hitting the tile floor.
Rudy Guede is an extremely athletic young man. He is a former semi-pro basketball player. Just weeks before Meredith's death, Guede broke into a law office. He entered the office through a window that was fifteen feet off the ground. He denied this of course, but Guede was later caught in Milan with a computer and cell phone stolen from the office. The window to the law office that guede used to gain enterance can be seen in the photo to the right. The entry window is past the gate and above the grating. This photo was taken by Frank Sfarzo, Perugia Shock.
Quick Jump Page Menu
Injustice in Perugia
a website detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito
Prosecution's Case
Lead Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini
Additional Resources
Professional Analysis
Injustice in Perugia
The Appeal
The Victim
Meredith's Killer
Wrongfully Convicted
About Us/Contact Us
Update September 26, 2013: Click here to see a video of a man climbing the wall to reach Filomena's window
The prosecution failed to prove that Rudy Guede would have been unable to gain entrance through the broken window. In fact, it would have been relatively easy for Guede. Judge Micheli said that climbing through that window would not require "a Spiderman." in October 2008, when he sentenced Rudy Guede to 30 years in prison for the murder of Meredith Kercher. We all know that Micheli is no fan of Amanda and Raffaele. Even he couldn't go along with the prosecution's incredibly weak attempt to show that the window was too high to gain entrance.
This is the one occasion where it woud have been nice if the prosecution was correct. If the window was too high or if the owner of the residence had instaled the security bars on that window as he did with the windows on the first floor, Meredith might still be alive today. For the record, the window now has those security bars. It just isn't possible to look back at the possibilities. It's too late for that. Meredith lost her life to a senseless act of inhumanity. There is no explanation for people like Guede. He is just another reminder that evil does exist.
8. Staged crime scene
The prosecution claimed that Amanda and Raffaele returned to the scene of the crime, and staged the crime scene. This is related to the staged break in, but this accusation by the prosecution is in relation to the staging of the murder itself. The prosecution stated that Meredith's body was moved to a different location and her bra was cut off by Amanda and Raffaele to make the crime look like it was committed by a lone attacker. Meredith was found covered with a duvet. The prosecution claimed that Amanda covered Meredith with the duvet because she didn't want to look at the corpse. Mignini boldly said that only a woman would cover the body. He insisted it had to be the act of a woman.
The prosecution stated blood evidence proved that Meredith was wearing her bra when she died. Mignini stated: "Nor is it just the blood on her bra which demonstrates this. It’s also where the blood is not on her body. Meredith was wearing her bra normally when she lay in the position in which she died, and she was still wearing it for quite some time after she was dead."
This is simply not true. In fact, the photos of Meredith's body show small round droplets of blood on her bare breasts. She was on her back, with her bra pushed above her breasts. She had an aspirating wound in her neck causing her blood to spray into the air and fall back down onto her body. The blood droplets landed on her bra and on her bare breasts, proving that her bra was removed before she died.
The evidence doesn't suggest that Meredith's body was moved hours after her death. Meredith was moved a few feet immediately after she was no longer able to fight. Guede moved her out of the pool of blood so he could sexually assault her. When she was still breathing, her bra was pulled up exposing her breasts. At this time blood was spraying into the air from the wound in her neck and falling back down onto the bra and her bare skin as Guede cut her bra off of her body and sexually assaulted her. Meredith's sexual assault was not staged by Amanda and Raffaele. Rudy Guede's DNA was found inside Meredith's body. That evidence would be impossible to stage.
Rudy Guede attacked and murdered Meredith Kercher. He acted alone. This wasn't a staged crime scene. The evidence clearly proves this.
It was reported in the media that the duvet must have been laid over Meredith's body long after she had died because there was no blood transferred onto the duvet. It was reported that the blood was dry when Meredith was covered.
This is simply not true. Guede moved Meredith away from the large puddle of blood. Meredith was still bleeding profusely after Guede moved her. There was significant blood transfer onto the duvet.
The photos are graphic in nature but are necessary to prove that significant amounts of Meredith's blood were transferred to the duvet.
9. Clean up
It was claimed by the prosecution that Amanda and Raffaele not only staged the crime scene as described above, they also made an effort to clean up the evidence that would point to them.
The prosecution claimed that the footprints detected with luminol proved there was a clean up effort. Luminol does not prove that there was any clean up effort. There was absolutely no proof presented in court showing any clean up. Luminol glows from many different substances other than blood. Luminol reacts with various household cleaners, different types of soil, rust in tap water, and many other substances. Luminol helps to find areas that may be blood. When the luminol glows, the area can then be tested to see if the stain is actually blood. None of the footprints detected with luminol were tested for blood. If they were tested, then the information was withheld by the prosecution because it did not show the result they wanted. Either way, the footprints detected with luminol were never proven to be blood. These footprints had nothing to do with the murder. They certainly do not prove that there was a clean up effort of any kind.
Prosecutor Mignini made the claim that Amanda attempted to clean up her finger prints from the crime scene. Mignini stated: "It is reasonable to hypothesize that she herself felt the need to eliminate the traces of her presence from an apartment in which she lived."
At the trial, the prosecutor's own fingerprint expert, Giuseppe Privitera, flatly refuted this hypothesis. He said fingerprints tend to get smudged, often it is hard to find good ones even of someone who lives at the scene of an investigation, and nothing he found at the cottage suggested that any effort had been made to remove fingerprints intentionally.
The prosecution presented no evidence whatsoever that proved that any clean up effort took place. Bloody shoe prints from Rudy Guede's shoes are seen going down the hall and right out the front door. How could Amanda and Raffaele clean the floor, removing all of the evidence that pointed at them, while leaving all of the evidence that pointed to Rudy completely untouched? There is no credible evidence putting Amanda or Raffaele in Meredith's room at the time of the murder. This type of clean up effort would simply be impossible. There is no credible evidence putting them in the room because they were not there. The prosecution's theory is simply nonsense.
10. Arrival of the Postal Police
The Postal Police were the first police to arrive at the cottage on November 2, 2007. They arrived to investigate two cell phones that were found in a nearby garden. The Postal Police handle this type of incident. The Carabinieri (Italian Police) arrived shortly after the Postal Police. The prosecution claimed that Amanda and Raffaele were surprised by the arrival of the Postal Police. Raffaele stated that he had already phoned his sister and the Carabinieri before the Postal Police arrived. Raffaele's sister was a police officer at the time. Amanda and Raffaele were not surprised at all. They actually assumed the Postal Police were the Carabinieri responding to Raffaele's call. The prosecution claimed that Raffaele went and hid in Amanda's room and called the Carabinieri after the Postal Police arrived. The prosecution was attempting to catch Raffaele in a lie. This was simply not the case. The video taken from a camera located in the parking garage across the street from the cottage supports Raffaele's claim.
The clock on the garage camera was ten to twelve minutes slow, not fast. The prosecution has totally misled and confused the public on this point. The prosecution repeatedly stated the camera timer was fast. The prosecution was wrong.
The reason we know the clock is slow is because the camera shows a picture of a Carabinieri (Italian Police) car, and a Carabinieri officer with the distinctive stripe running down his trouser leg, in a clip time-stamped 1:22 pm on the day Meredith's body was discovered. However, at 1:22 pm, the Carabinieri were driving around, unable to find the place. They called Amanda's cell phone at 1:29 pm to ask for directions. Amanda handed the phone to Raffaele who handed it to one of the Postal Police, who explained how to get there. That call lasted four minutes and fifty seven seconds, meaning it did not end until 1:34 pm. Therefore, even if one assumes the call did not end until after the car appeared in the video, the clock had to have been at least ten to twelve minutes slow.
This is significant, because it means the camera footage shows the Postal Police arriving after Raffaele called the emergency number. The claim that he went and hid in Amanda's room, called his sister, and then called the emergency number twice, a series of calls that took about five minutes, is nonsense.
Raffaele was being completely honest with the Postal Police when they arrived. This is just another example of how the prosecution released completely misleading information to the media.
11. Motive
Prosecutor Mignini presented at least five different motives for the murder before finally deciding that a motive simply was not necessary. We say at least five because Mignini changed his mind so many times, We might have missed one or two of his suggested motives over the course of the trial. Here's a list of the motives that Mignini suggested throughout the course of the trial.
1. Mignini said that Meredith was murdered because she refused to participate in a sex game. He claimed that Raffaele read satanic comic books. Raffaele's interest in this topic fueled a satanic sexual orgy. Meredith refused to participate in the orgy so she was murdered. Amanda was to have ordered Raffaele and Rudy to hold Meredith on her knees as Amanda stabbed her with a knife. There was never any evidence at all to support this ridiculous claim. This was simply a fantasy dreamt up in Mignini's mind. This is not the first time Mignini has had these visions. He already had a history of dreaming up satanic ritualistic murder fantasies.
2. Mignini suggested that drugs made Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito crazy. They murdered Meredith in a drug crazed rage. Amanda and Raffaele did admit to smoking marijuana that evening but no other drugs were reported. Marijuana is not a substance known to cause rage. All of the women living in the cottage were reported to smoke marijuana. This was hardly a solid motive.
3. Amanda and Raffaele murdered Meredith so they could steal her money. It was pointed out to Mignini that Amanda was an extremely hard working young woman. Amanda worked three jobs to save up enough money so she could travel to Italy for her studies. Amanda had a job in Italy at the time of her arrest. She also had a family back home that was more that willing to provide financial support if she were to need money. At the time of her arrest, Amanda had plenty of money in her personal account. Raffaele came from a wealthy family. The motive of theft was simply not realistic.
4. Mignini's next motive was simply one of hate. Mignini said that Amanda hated Meredith. The truth was, Amanda and Meredith were friends. Text messages were shown in court showing kind messages exchanged between Amanda and Meredith. Shortly before the murder, Amanda and Meredith went to the chocolate festival together. Amanda and Meredith were together earlier on the same day of Meredith's murder. Meredith, Amanda and Raffaele spent time in the cottage together. Raffaele made lunch while Amanda played songs on her guitar for Raffaele and Meredith. Amanda said that she had many photographs of Meredith and herself on her personal computer. These photographs would have shown the friendship of the two women. The court never saw these photos because investigators damaged her computer beyond repair. No explanation was ever given for the damage.
5. Mignini then made the outrageous statement that Amanda was a natural-born killer, a naturally violent person. There wasn't one thing in her past to suggest this. Amanda had never shown anger to anyone. Amanda was an honor student with absolutely no violence in her past. This theory quickly evaporated.
During closing arguments, after all of his different theories had fallen apart, Mignini told the jury: "There is no motive." Mignini stated during closing arguments that there was no motive. He was bold enough to say that the evidence was so solid that a motive simply wasn't necessary.
As hard as he tried, Mignini was unable to come up with a credible motive. The reason for this is simple. Amanda and Raffaele have no history of violence or sexual aggression and they have never been involved in any type of group sex. There is no credible evidence that more than one person assaulted Meredith Kercher, or that Amanda and Raffaele were present when Meredith was murdered.
Now we get to the second part of the prosecution's attempt to prove a staged break in. The prosecution told the court that the window was simply to high off the ground for Guede to enter. The window was thirteen feet off the ground. You can see a picture of the window with the shudders opened below on the left. The lower level windows on the cottage were protected with security bars. The bars from the window below could have been used as a ladder as seen in the photo below to the right. This man was able to climb into the window in a pair dress shoes.
