Blogs and Stories
The Other Murders That Could Save Her
Stefano Medici / AP Photo
Charges of misconduct in Italy’s other notorious crime—a series of killings described by bestselling author Doug Preston and optioned by Tom Cruise—could discredit the prosecutor of Amanda Knox.
Tuesday was the day many insiders watching the Meredith Kercher murder trial had been waiting for. In the heart of Florence, inside a vaulted-ceiling courtroom with a giant crucifix, a three-judge panel was to finally rule on abuse-of-power charges against Giuliano Mignini and Michele Giuttari. These stem from the so-called Monster of Florence case, which inspired a bestselling book in the United States that has been optioned for the screen by Tom Cruise.
How, Knox’s supporters asked, could a prosecutor under investigation for misconduct be allowed to lead one of the country’s most notorious murder trials?
Mignini is the lead prosecutor in the murder case against Seattle native Amanda Knox and her one-time boyfriend, Rafaelle Sollecito, whose supporters have repeatedly alleged that Mignini is crazy and corrupt. Giuttari is the former head of the Florentine police force, and is now Italy’s top crime novelist. Among his seven thrillers is A Death in Florence, based on a serial killer who stalked the Florentine hills from 1968 to 1985 murdering and mutilating lovers parked in secluded spots.
The crux of the misconduct charges against the two men is that Mignini, the investigating magistrate, gave Police Chief Giuttari inappropriate assistance by ordering up a criminal analysis that should properly have been requested and paid for by the police. This transpired during the investigation of Francesco Narducci, a Perugian doctor who mysteriously floated to the surface of Lake Trasimeno in 1985 and who became Mignini’s prime suspect in the Monster killings. But after hours of deliberation, the verdict for Mignini and Giuttari was postponed. The presiding judge asked to hear four more witnesses to clarify various points about the investigation. The next court date is set for September.
The case has been closely watched in both Italy and the United States. American supporters of Amanda Knox were hoping for a guilty verdict to validate their conviction that Mignini is a rogue prosecutor; many Italians were hoping a not-guilty verdict would vindicate their judicial system. Neither side got their wish.
In Knox’s hometown of Seattle, there has been a steady drumbeat of outrage about Mignini—how, Knox's supporters asked, could a prosecutor under investigation for misconduct be allowed to lead one of the country’s most notorious murder trials? But the Mignini case is not necessarily anomalous. In reality, active prosecutors are often under investigation in Italy. Unlike in the United States, even the most banal accusations against anyone in power usually leads to trial here, clogging the country’s courtrooms with tedious disputes that cast a negative light on the entire judicial system. Italian prosecutors and investigators have less leeway than their American counterparts, so bending the rules is often part of criminal investigations. Earlier this year, Mignini was cleared of other charges against him, including wiretapping journalists.
The Monster of Florence case is better known, however, because it inspired a bestselling book in the U.S. and Mignini had an ugly run-in with the author, Douglas Preston. In 2006, Preston was called into Mignini’s office in Perugia while he was working with local journalist Mario Spezi on a true-crime account of the Florence murders, based on Spezi’s years’ covering the case, which he chronicled in an Italian book titled Dolci Colline di Sangue (Sweet Bloody Hills). Tom Cruise, who later optioned Preston’s book, is rumored to be eyeing the role of Spezi, who became the indisputable expert on the Monster case.
Spezi will be the star of the movie, no doubt, but whether he will be cast as a hero or villain in real life is still up to the courts. Local authorities in Perugia say they long suspected him of manipulating evidence in the case, and Preston got caught up in their investigation into Spezi. In a bizarre intercepted phone conversation between Spezi and Preston, the two seem to discuss whether or not the police have “made their rounds,” which lead investigators to assume they had planted evidence to bolster their theory of the crime. Spezi was jailed for 23 days on suspicion of planting evidence. Preston was called into Mignini’s office for a two-plus-hour interrogation that the two describe very differently.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
The Knox Trial Endgame
Barbie Latza Nadeau has reported from Italy for Newsweek Magazine since 1997. She also writes for CNN Traveller, Budget Travel Magazine and Frommer's.
Berlusconi's Tranny Defense
Barbie Latza Nadeau has reported from Italy for Newsweek Magazine since 1997. She also writes for CNN Traveller, Budget Travel Magazine and Frommer's.
Knox Evidence Will Stand Alone
Barbie Latza Nadeau has reported from Italy for Newsweek Magazine since 1997. She also writes for CNN Traveller, Budget Travel Magazine and Frommer's.
I've watched a few specials on the Knox case, so I'm definitely no expert and can only rely on what the media here say, but it certainly sounds as if she and her boyfriend were railroaded. Indeed, it seems obvious to everyone except the Italian courts that Guede is the murderer and he's trying to shift the blame. What he has done is create more victims.
Fascinating. Appreciate this being put into context. There should obviously be more investigative reportage into the contested Preston version of Florence killings before Cruise takes it to the big screen. Interesting that both Spezi and Giuttari wrote books about the case, yet the jury is still out on both of them. Guess the courts will have to determine whose version is the truth. Certainly glad not to be a member of the juries deciding either of these cases, but especially the Knox-Perugia one.
Excellent story within a story. Knox's case shouldn't be getting mixed up with this other murky feud. It should stand or fall on its own.
This is off thread & gush from a fan of BLN. This blog shows what an expierenced, dedicated, investigative reporter can produce. BLN's blogs could help change the courts verdict. Barbie is good.
Mignini has a long history as a true rogue prosecutor, with little in the way of scruples, much less basic morality.
Why he is allowed to prosecute this case is beyond me.
He's a disgrace to the profession of law, and his sordid history taints the Italian judicial system.
What long history?
Making sweeping statements about a person's morality and professional competence is wholly irresponsible without factual back up.
Calling someone sordid and unfit for law has no meaning without serious research into the facts of the case.
Are you sure you don't have an agenda about the case?
Who told you that Mignini is a rogue prosecuter? Friends of Amanda? In Italy it's normal to investigate the investigators, the investigators of investigators and so on. You can't get it, that's why it's beyond you. Thanks the Almighty, the American crowds can do nothing in Italy. Well, nothing except for looking ridiculous.
Italy IS NOT a country where the killer hires a PR.
And it is NOT the mark of an intelligent person to speak so junky about something that you know NOTHING. All you know is the infamous wave of CBS spectacle. Is it about rallying behind the home team? Are you that stupid?
Many American investigators have gotten involved and are terrified at how poorly the investigation was done. The evidence doesn't stack up and the investigation was botched.
If it were in this country... this case would have been done. They would be looking for another suspect.
Please.
Study the forensic evidence. This alone would be more than sufficient in American courts.
You are being swayed by the PR spin put out by Friends of Amanda and the American mediocre media.
Study the facts objectively, then make these kind of declarations about American investigations.
Thanks for providing a balanced and factual account of this convoluted back story (or story within a story as another poster put it). The demonizing of Mignini has had a huge impact on how the unrelated case involving the murder of Meredith Kercher is perceived in the US by people who rely solely on network coverage and local affiliates for information.
The idea that American prosecutors are not equally corrupt is absurd! To all of you who have no idea how the american judicial process ACTUALLY works, allow me to "school" you: In the United States, Courts have REPEATEDLY ruled that the FACT that a prosecutor (or a witness at the prosecutor's behest) lied, cheated, obfuscated or otherwise behaved corruptly in a particular case in NO WAY impacts another case.
I've seen many examples of courrupt behavior by Assistant US Attorneys where for example they ALTER transcripts of TESTIMONY, when they did not like the way evidence came out. So please educate yourselves about your "justice" system before mounting your high horse.
Agreed. Prosecutors in the United States can be just as strange as this Mignini fellow. Although I will say, this prosecutor does seem a little more off than most. Sex game gone wrong? I don't think so. Ridiculous.
The problem here, is that the public deludes itself by failing to understand that the prosecutor's call to winning ranks higher than his call to mete justice. Judges are complicit, prosecutors are only sanctioned in the most extreme cases. Are people so naive as to believe that the prosecutors who went after Ted Stevens went "rogue" only in that instance? Of course not! They emplyed the same tactics in nearly every case they prosecuted (and they learned those tactics from prosecutors who went before them and trained them). The difference is that Stevens had the financial resources AND THE POLITICAL JUICE to expose them. A huge proportion of the shlubs in prison today were equally abused, but couldn't do anything about it and no one listened! These are american prosecutors for you.
Poster Tigerjack above said: "Mignini has a long history as a true rogue prosecutor".
This is a well known talking point of the Friends of Amanda people. In fact, as far as I know, the issue of how he acted in the Monster of Florence is the only bad "history" he has. And - as we see - the inquiry into his professional behaviour in that case is working out.
Money, money, money, money is what is behind the smearing of Mignini, by a few interested persons: some because they want to sell more copies of their books; some because they want to sell movie rights (and let's face it, since a Tom Cruise movie these days can not be made for less than $500 million, a percentage point or two for the movie rights goes a long way to help pay the mortgage), some because they have a grudge to grind after being humiliated by a provincial Italian prosecutor, some because they feel that America is superior in all ways to foreign countries, including their justice systems.
Funny how the pitifully few apologists for Mignini use the word "smear", whenever the truth about him is exposed.
TigerJack, are you saying that you have "exposed the truth" about Mignini? I think that the public / the readers here would be especially interested if you could list any other incident in Mignini's professional background which - together with the Monster of Florence case - gives him what you call a "long history as a true rogue prosecutor".
In geometry you need more than one point to draw a line. In the same manner, to have a "long history" of professional misconduct, you need at least two cases, preferably more.
Please, tell us about Mignini's secret past which no one else has known about.
Thank you Ms Nadeau. But what took you so long? This is all old news You have been writing about this trial for some months but never mentioned the Monster of Florence until now. Why? I have blogged seven times on Beast to your previous articles citing the Monster case and the issue of the the prosecution's integrity and still you wrote nothing. This has always been a big deal in the trial! It is not something that you just "discovered" as a result of incredible investigative reporting. You left it untold! Apparently intentionally! Well at least you have finally acknowledged the Byzantine nature of this case now. It is only fair that readers understand it may not be as simple as reported so far. Amanda may be guilty as sin, but then again perhaps she was just a very convenient suspect. It would not be the first time in Italy or in the US that a prosecutor has wanted a "win" very badly to save his reputation or win an election and ended up playing it fast and loose. I have no dog in this hunt but I believe strongly in fairness.
Personally I don't think it's Barbie Nadeau's duty to update on this. Almost nothing has been written about this side part of the case aside from the Monster of Florence Book, so why must she take the heat when she decides to write about it? That strikes me as unfair.
However, I must admit that the passive aggressive articles on this case by the Daily Beast make it pretty easy to see what the author thinks. Nadeau has always thought Amanda is guilty and I don't expect that to change. I still enjoy her articles (and she's quite pretty to boot!).
For me, I think the prosecutor's theory of the crime is just so stupid that the prosecutor's abuse of power charges are almost immaterial compared to actual the case he's presenting.
I am afraid I must disagree. It is her duty as a reporter to tell the full story and let the chips fall where they may. That is simply good reportage. We expect it. When you leave out something as important as accusations against the prosecutor and the police from another case, you are opening yourself to criticism.
The 'reporting' of this case has been extremely biased toward the prosecution and I was surprised to see this one.
I have no vested interested in Amanda Knox but I've read a few articles elsewhere to see what we read here is crazily biased.
I also remembering traveling with another woman in Italy in my early 20s and being floored at the hate/jealousy Italian women had for American women (luckily I look Italian but my blonde blue-eyed friend was quite a target). Our ease of traveling by ourselves and being so independent brought up some interesting feelings of envy and resentment which was expressed to us positively and negatively by Italian women, and puzzlement and curiousity of men. And of course the men expected us to be sluts. The Italian women had some great things we don't (pace of life, regard as mothers), but all things being equal, that trip made me so thankful to be lucky enough to be born in the US.
It's easy to imagine being made a legal scapegoat in a place like that.
I don't expect unbiased reporting on the DB, it's all about having a provocative point of view, but glad to see this.
And if you read Monster of Florence it does make you wonder about this case.... Besides it is a really good read!
This trial is being heard by an Italian jury in Perugia. The rules of evidence and jury rules are different in sharp ways from American courts.
The Knox jury meets twice a week and two of the eight jurors are judges themselves. They are not told to abstain from reading or watching news on the case. The addition of the particulars in the Italian trial system will create variables that would not exist in the U.S.
The fact that 1- Knox has told three versions of what happened the night of the murder; 2- There is corroborating evidence that cotradicts her latest version 3- Sollecito says he "does not remember anything" about the night of the murder will create enough momentum to convict and then let the appeals court review this strange tale.
You need to read more about why there were three stories and the nature of Italian evidence. Search engine for you, pick the news org you trust.
Verinicaxy -- What counts is what the Perugia jury interprets out of all this. That's what all the guessing game should be about, not "the facts". The defense has a narrative in competition with the prosecution's narrative. 12 Italian judges have gone over the arguments for and against a trial. The final word by these jurists is that there was sufficient cause for indictment and a trial.
The defense is on a steep climb here. Knox has said in court things that are contradicted by evidence. She is not a credible witness. Sollecito is practically admitting guilt by saying he does not remember anything about the night of the murder. Or he is challenging the prosecution to prove he was some place other than in his apartment sleeping. Then there is the bloody footprint in the bathroom floormat, just his foot size. Not Guede's, not Knox's, not Kercher's.
My feeling is the prosecution's narrative will be more convincing that the defense's.
@piktor: "Perception is reality", so yes I agree the narrative is what is critical. Sad for so many.
When I heard this joke I started using it when someone was lying to me. You just say, "You're a liar, maybe you should become a prosecutor." I myself was wrongfully prosecuted by a DA with a desire for retaliation for my telling the truth. I know what it feels like. We have a country full of those kind of prosecutors. I find it very frightening.
Mignini appears no different than the mediocre prosecutors here in the USA. In my opinion, when a person confesses to a crime initially, then changes the tune when they get lawyered up, they are usually lying. The prosecutor's challenge to the court is to convince the jurors with what little evidence he has, that Knox and her boyfriend were involved in the murder. Judging by their statements when arrested, I believe they are guilty. If no bias is present, they will be found guilty.
There a lot of guys on death row who would disagree with you. First confessions may usually be true but far too frequently we have learned that prosecutors and police put heavy pressure on individuals to confess up to and including writing the confession for the accused to sign. And to make matters worse we have many examples of prosecutors hiding evidence that might exonerate the accused in order to win their case. So "bias" is often found out after the fact..... too many times after the execution. in this trial there is already suspicion based on the prosecutor's history, so I for one will not be so quick to conclude Amanda is guilty.
Attractive young American female overseas = innocent
Attractive young American female in U.S.A. = guilty
From the Today show, to this blog, to other American newspapers, the above appears to be the general assessment. I don't know if Knox is innocent or guilty but I do believe our feelings about her would be different were she on trial in the U.S. For one thing, the face of the victim in this trial will be just as common as the victim from the "craigs list killer" case, or the little girl from the "Anthony" case.
Nancy Grace would probably have Knox on nightly and she would get a SIMILAR "angel face" nickname in the U.S. Probably something like "pretty killer".
All of us are biased and lack objectivity when a fellow American is under attack by non-Americans. At the end of the day, a young woman has been brutally murdered. HER parents, friends, family and country will never see her again. She deserves justice but I doubt she will ever get it.
Geez! Simply because she is an American doesn't make her innocent.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.