Continuation Part Eight: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Grinder]

There was a legal opinion from an internationally recognized expert in extradition law, saying that the US-Italy extradition treaty itself bans people from 'being tried for the same acts'.

In essence, even though its not technically double jeopardy, the Hellman trial was essentially a full re-hearing on the same acts, resulting in an acquittal, and that's the end of the road so far as extradition is concerned.

Amanda is probably safe in the US under any scenario. Rafaele may have to pass time in prison until the ECHR can rectify this fiasco. I'm still hoping, and leaning towards believing, the ISC will outright reject Nencini's opinion, which he has all but tee'd up for them, and dismiss the case outright for an insufficiency of evidence to 'prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, because the Italian jurists are that enlightened.

That's not what he said. You should reread his parsing of the 6th article of the treaty.

 

[Desert Fox]

I will argue that this latest trial decision seems such a mess that the US will likely find some excuse not to extradite her

 

[Diocletus]

Yes, if we assumed that the blood was so dilute that TMB was negative, then DNA would be negative. Indeed according to a met document even TMB positive blood samples can be below the limit for standard DNA testing. (Though LCN techniques may be tried).

Against this is light output is directly related to haemoglobin levels; if so dilute the Luminol should be faint, which I do not think was observed.

Keep in mind that a large percentage of her attempted amplifications were LCN. She would attempt to amplify everything that quantified at 1 pg/uL or greater. Notwithstanding her horrendous lab practice.

 

[LondonJohn]

Thank you for your wonderfully concise answers.

The Luminol photographs show light blobs on the booties of the technicians. Some have suggested that they applied way too much. Is there a relationship with the amount applied and the brightness of the result? I must say that Luminol seems a sketchy method, reliant on level of brightness for 30 seconds.

There's another critical factor in all this: the exposure settings of the camera. Any photograph is hugely reliant on exposure settings for the apparent light levels (for example, take a photo of the sky with two very different exposure settings, and the apparent light levels in the resulting photographs will be very different).

We know from a knowledge of the ASA, aperture and shutter speed settings on the camera taking the Kercher Luminol photos that the overall exposure levels were something like THREE times the norm for Luminol photography. This means that any levels of photoluminescence would almost certainly have appeared exaggerated in the resultant photos.

In addition, it's very clear that the Luminol itself was grossly misapplied - it was pretty much puddling on the floor, rather than a fine mist. Throw in the proven fact that the forensics goons had been traipsing around through the entire flat since the day after the murder, inevitably picking up and depositing blood evidence in the process, and you have the recipe for unreliable and misleading Luminol photos.

Perhaps most important of all in any Luminol discussion is the overarching fact that Luminol should only ever be used as a direction tool for investigators. The very fact that it is an ephemeral indicator means that it shouldn't constitute evidence in and of itself. Rather, it should point investigators towards the hard evidence: where to perform confirmatory tests for blood/DNA, where the crime might have occurred, directions of blood spatter/streaks etc. In court, therefore, prosecutors should only ever be mentioning Luminol testing as a stepping stone to other, admissible evidence gathering.

 

[Diocletus]

This is a rather traditionalist view of gender, that one's sex is somehow predetermined, rather than being a consequence of social stereotyping. If heterozygotes want to wear frocks and be girl friends they should be free so to do.

Actually I think this will be a translation issue ragazze vs ragazzi?

Nencinis belief that the Y chromosomes were deposited by women demonstrates a fundamental mistake by the defense. They should have said that the semen was from Amanda. The judges are so dumb that they would have believed it, and so perverted that they would have tripped over themselves trying to get it tested.

 

[carbonjam72]

Extradition Unlikely

That's not what he said. You should reread his parsing of the 6th article of the treaty.

Here's a quote from the article, and here's the accompanying link: http://blog.oup.com/2014/04/is-amanda-knox-extraditable-from-the-united-states-to-italy/

(I notice they managed to imbed the link in a copy paste, very clever, at least news to me).

(By M. Cherif Bassiouni, is the writer/legal authority.)

"Whatever the interpretation of article VI may be—“same act,” “same facts,” or the broader “same conduct”—Amanda Knox would not be extraditable to Italy should Italy seek her extradition because she was retried for the same acts, the same facts, and the same conduct. Her case was reviewed three times with different outcomes even though she was not actually tried three times. In light of the jurisprudence of the various circuits on this issue, it is unlikely that extradition would be granted. - See more at: http://blog.oup.com/2014/04/is-amanda-knox-extraditable-from-the-united-states-to-italy/#sthash.NEUncKJq.dpuf"

By the way, and this may sound like total horse poo, but I actually have a fairly close lawyer relative who works in some state or federal attorney general's office, I asked him what he thought would happen if Amanda's extradition was requested. His feeling was there would be found to be an endless series of 'technical defects' in the extradition request, such that it would never be granted, i.e. buried in bureaucratic limbo until people forgot about it. I'm hoping we 'just say no', and tell them in no uncertain terms its because there's no evidence to suggest Amanda committed the crime.

 

[proudfootz]

Earlier today Sky News was reporting of a botched execution in America.

America does not require my agreement or respect, it will act like any other western sovereign state.

Just saying.

The US is a bit of a rogue state, so whether it will honor its treaty obligations are anyone's guess.

 

[Diocletus]

Italy has committed a prior material breach of the extradition treaty by failing to act in good faith in its prosecution of Knox. It's executive branch, who I believe is in charge of the extradition process, will know this.

 

[Diocletus]

The US is a bit of a rogue state, so whether it will honor its treaty obligations are anyone's guess.

Italy has already breached. See above.

 

[Grinder]

Here's a quote from the article, and here's the accompanying link: http://blog.oup.com/2014/04/is-amanda-knox-extraditable-from-the-united-states-to-italy/

(I notice they managed to imbed the link in a copy paste, very clever, at least news to me).

(By M. Cherif Bassiouni, is the writer/legal authority.)

"Whatever the interpretation of article VI may be—“same act,” “same facts,” or the broader “same conduct”—Amanda Knox would not be extraditable to Italy should Italy seek her extradition because she was retried for the same acts, the same facts, and the same conduct. Her case was reviewed three times with different outcomes even though she was not actually tried three times. In light of the jurisprudence of the various circuits on this issue, it is unlikely that extradition would be granted. - See more at: http://blog.oup.com/2014/04/is-amanda-knox-extraditable-from-the-united-states-to-italy/#sthash.NEUncKJq.dpuf"

By the way, and this may sound like total horse poo, but I actually have a fairly close lawyer relative who works in some state or federal attorney general's office, I asked him what he thought would happen if Amanda's extradition was requested. His feeling was there would be found to be an endless series of 'technical defects' in the extradition request, such that it would never be granted, i.e. buried in bureaucratic limbo until people forgot about it. I'm hoping we 'just say no', and tell them in no uncertain terms its because there's no evidence to suggest Amanda committed the crime.

Read Article 6, it refers specifically to the state being requested having already tried the person for the same crime. This is not the situation in this case.

It is notable that Cherif Bassiouni gives no examples of this in any extradition from any country.The only cases of this type of system acquitting and then convicting that I've seen have the extradition going through.

The Italians have met the technicalities for extradition. If you or anyone have an example of a full hearing of a case by US courts that would be of interest.

I believe it will be left to the State Department.

 

[Diocletus]

Read Article 6, it refers specifically to the state being requested having already tried the person for the same crime. This is not the situation in this case.

It is notable that Cherif Bassiouni gives no examples of this in any extradition from any country.The only cases of this type of system acquitting and then convicting that I've seen have the extradition going through.

The Italians have met the technicalities for extradition. If you or anyone have an example of a full hearing of a case by US courts that would be of interest.

I believe it will be left to the State Department.

No they haven't. They have to request it first. And actually, before they do that, they have to be free to make such a request.

 

[Bill Williams]

Another blunt assertion from Nencini (from PMF)

Finally, she was perfectly aware that, throughout the night of 1-2 November 2007, none of the other residents of the flat would return home, and therefore she had all the time necessary to undertake the alteration of the crime scene and the obstruction of the investigation.

So there you are Anglo, sorted.

This is not entirely true. Filomena was within easy distance. If Knox had been involved, it would not have been the leisurely clean-up that some claim when they say the two were caught by the Postal Police in the midst of. Acc. to Massei the postals arrived just before 1 pm on the 2nd, a full 15-16 hours after the murder.

A guilty Knox would have feared that Filomena could have returned, if only to retrieve her computer for something.

Once again, sterling logic from Nencini. Donald Sterling, that is.

 

[kwill]

Another blunt assertion from Nencini (from PMF)

Finally, she was perfectly aware that, throughout the night of 1-2 November 2007, none of the other residents of the flat would return home, and therefore she had all the time necessary to undertake the alteration of the crime scene and the obstruction of the investigation.

So there you are Anglo, sorted.

Wait . . . really?

Nencini knows for sure that Amanda Knox was "perfectly aware" of what the Italian women were planning to do that night? Is this in the testimony somewhere, or did he just, uh, decide it?

 

[Samson]

More reflections on this from Nencini.

Finally, she was perfectly aware that, throughout the night of 1-2 November 2007, none of the other residents of the flat would return home, and therefore she had all the time necessary to undertake the alteration of the crime scene and the obstruction of the investigation.

Now from her email.

So I arrived home and the first abnormal thing I noticed was the door was wide open. Here's the thing about the door to our house: its broken, in such a way that you have to use the keys to keep it closed. If we don't have the door locked, it is really easy for the wind to blow the door open, and so, my roommates and I always have the door locked unless we are running really quickly to bring the garbage out or to get something from the neighbors who live below us.

Another important piece of information: for those who don't know, I inhabit a house of two stories, of which my three roommates and I share the second story apartment. There are four Italian guys of our age between 22 and 26 who live below us. We are all quiet good friends and we talk often. Giacomo is especially welcome because he plays guitar with me and Laura, one of my roommates, and is, or was dating Meredith. The other three are Marco, Stefano, and Ricardo.

Anyway, so the door was wide open. Strange, yes, but not so strange that I really thought anything about it. I assumed someone in the house was doing exactly what I just said, taking out the trash or talking really quickly to the neighbors downstairs.

So her account directly contradicts Nencini's assertion. What communication had she had with Laura, or Filomena, or Meredith in the previous few days for Nencini to manufacture his statement?
Or was she so cunning she had to pretend she thought someone might be home to help her narrative?

 

[Grinder]

No they haven't. They have to request it first. And actually, before they do that, they have to be free to make such a request.

I was making the same assumptions that Cherif Bassiouni made. Clearly the trial isn't over and they haven't requested. If the ISC affirms and the Italian government requests, they will meet the standard of the treaty and article six which was the only real point.

 

[carbonjam72]

Extradition Unlikely, as per Bassiouni

Read Article 6, it refers specifically to the state being requested having already tried the person for the same crime. This is not the situation in this case.

It is notable that Cherif Bassiouni gives no examples of this in any extradition from any country.The only cases of this type of system acquitting and then convicting that I've seen have the extradition going through.

The Italians have met the technicalities for extradition. If you or anyone have an example of a full hearing of a case by US courts that would be of interest.

I believe it will be left to the State Department.

Dearest Grinder, this is Bassiouni's legal opinion, so if you're unhappy with it, your argument is with Prof Bassoumi (fabulous name by the way, and now I'll remember it as you've forced me to type it twice).

I think the point Prof B was making, was that case law in the US circuit courts supports his position (there are federal courts in all 50 states - some have more than 1 federal court; then circuit courts are courts of appeal - I think there's like 13 of these suckers; and then the circuit courts appeal to the US Supreme Court), without regard to international law, as US law is the only law relevant to US interpretation of US treaty obligations.

Your assertion that, "Italians have met the technicalities for extradition", is at this point pure conjecture. Not just because the convictions haven';t yet been affirmed, but because there is a treaty obligation to 'provide a summary of facts sufficient to believe the defendant committed the acts'. You have to understand, no court is obligated to do anything. There is so much case law floating around, they can figure out what they think is right, and pick and choose the precedents that support their position. Justice, at least in the US, is painted with a broad brush.

But I do believe in the end, that the US state Dept will never allow Amanda to be extradited because absolutely no one here thinks she got a fair trial. The question is though, will it ever even get into a US court? I guess we'll know in a year...

 

[Grinder]

More reflections on this from Nencini.

Finally, she was perfectly aware that, throughout the night of 1-2 November 2007, none of the other residents of the flat would return home, and therefore she had all the time necessary to undertake the alteration of the crime scene and the obstruction of the investigation.

Now from her email.

So I arrived home and the first abnormal thing I noticed was the door was wide open. Here's the thing about the door to our house: its broken, in such a way that you have to use the keys to keep it closed. If we don't have the door locked, it is really easy for the wind to blow the door open, and so, my roommates and I always have the door locked unless we are running really quickly to bring the garbage out or to get something from the neighbors who live below us.

Another important piece of information: for those who don't know, I inhabit a house of two stories, of which my three roommates and I share the second story apartment. There are four Italian guys of our age between 22 and 26 who live below us. We are all quiet good friends and we talk often. Giacomo is especially welcome because he plays guitar with me and Laura, one of my roommates, and is, or was dating Meredith. The other three are Marco, Stefano, and Ricardo.

Anyway, so the door was wide open. Strange, yes, but not so strange that I really thought anything about it. I assumed someone in the house was doing exactly what I just said, taking out the trash or talking really quickly to the neighbors downstairs.

So her account directly contradicts Nencini's assertion. What communication had she had with Laura, or Filomena, or Meredith in the previous few days for Nencini to manufacture his statement?
Or was she so cunning she had to pretend she thought someone might be home to help her narrative?

She knew that Meredith was going to the pizza party and Filomena was going to Luca's or whatever her boyfriend fiancee. Laura was in Rome and it is a fair assumption IMO that Amanda would be aware of it.

Had she murdered Meredith I do believe the email would be structured for her position.

 

[Diocletus]

I was making the same assumptions that Cherif Bassiouni made. Clearly the trial isn't over and they haven't requested. If the ISC affirms and the Italian government requests, they will meet the standard of the treaty and article six which was the only real point.

Well, my understanding is that the requesting isn't done by the same crooked judicial cabal that is running this railroad. Also, you're assuming that Knox can't pursue some collateral action to gum up the extradition process before any request makes it to the US.

 

[acbytesla]

Dearest Grinder, this is Bassiouni's legal opinion, so if you're unhappy with it, your argument is with Prof Bassoumi (fabulous name by the way, and now I'll remember it as you've forced me to type it twice).

I think the point Prof B was making, was that case law in the US circuit courts supports his position (there are federal courts in all 50 states - some have more than 1 federal court; then circuit courts are courts of appeal - I think there's like 13 of these suckers; and then the circuit courts appeal to the US Supreme Court), without regard to international law, as US law is the only law relevant to US interpretation of US treaty obligations.

Your assertion that, "Italians have met the technicalities for extradition", is at this point pure conjecture. Not just because the convictions haven';t yet been affirmed, but because there is a treaty obligation to 'provide a summary of facts sufficient to believe the defendant committed the acts'. You have to understand, no court is obligated to do anything. There is so much case law floating around, they can figure out what they think is right, and pick and choose the precedents that support their position. Justice, at least in the US, is painted with a broad brush.

But I do believe in the end, that the US state Dept will never allow Amanda to be extradited because absolutely no one here thinks she got a fair trial. The question is though, will it ever even get into a US court? I guess we'll know in a year...

His theory of the result wouldn't surprise me. They can delay and delay and delay in the judicial system for years. Just look at this case. Meredith was murdered almost 7 years ago and my bet is that Italian Supreme Court doesn't rule on it for another year at least, and it wouldn't surprise that they find some reason to hold a 4th trial. But you have to wonder....Are these people totally immune to public opinion?

I'm kind of done making predictions about what the courts will do. Logic doesn't seem to matter in any court of law...even though I'm sure judges thinks it does.

I'm glad that Amanda is home but I worry for Raffaele. It definitely looks like he may be made a martyr in this case...stuck in Italy.

 

[carbonjam72]

Raf's Limbo

His theory of the result wouldn't surprise me. They can delay and delay and delay in the judicial system for years. Just look at this case. Meredith was murdered almost 7 years ago and my bet is that Italian Supreme Court doesn't rule on it for another year at least, and it wouldn't surprise that they find some reason to hold a 4th trial. But you have to wonder....Are these people totally immune to public opinion?

I'm kind of done making predictions about what the courts will do. Logic doesn't seem to matter in any court of law...even though I'm sure judges thinks it does.

I'm glad that Amanda is home but I worry for Raffaele. It definitely looks like he may be made a martyr in this case...stuck in Italy.

Definitely agree. Raf is the one whose liberty is in jeopardy. I cling to the hope the ISC will reject Nencini, and dismiss the case outright for insufficiency of evidence. What's amazing though, is how many openings Nencini provided for the ISC to reject his opinion, hard to believe he's not intentionally tanking the case. Then again, he certainly looks the part of the brutal ignorant buffoon.