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

[acbytesla]

Nancy Grace is truly evil.

I know. It really is all about Nancy. This is all just self promotion. She appeals to the worst in everybody and their are just enough people out there that hate themselves and others to get sucked into that evil. (I think we all have a little of that dark side in us)

It's easy to "blame the other guy",instead of realizing that it is us. That we are the problem and Nancy feeds off that in us all. I had enough of her in the OJ trial, but after hearing her every time just run her mouth about Casey Anthony, I really got sick of her. I actually think the jury made the right decision in that case. Not that I didn't think that Casey Anthony might be guilty, just that I never thought the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt....which is the requirement.

The person who surprises me is Dan Abrams. He has a tendency to see the case through the defense's eyes...and he never did in this case.

 

[Strozzi]

It would also be interesting hearing an opinion about the significance of Raffaele's 112 call to the Carabinieri (in relation to the arrival of the Postal Police).....

When Amanda had already summoned Filomena to the scene?

According to Massei, it was a little after 12 noon. The import of the whole "Which came first, the 112 call or the arrival of the Posties", is that guilters believe that Battistelli had caught Knox and Sollecito unaware; and it was only then that AK and RS needed to establish that they'd been putting out the alarm.

Well, according to Massei's timeline, the Postal Police arrive, "a little before 1 pm." So Knox and Sollecito had been putting out the alarm for almost an hour by that time.

And by ALL accounts, the Postal Police had the same "level of alarm" as Raffaele and Amanda. They refused to knock down Meredith's door, not suspecting anything, really, more than a confusing burglary where nothing obvious had been stolen.....

...... other than the phones and money behind that locked door, with Rudy's fingerprints in Meredith's purse.

So.... do you find anything meaningful in Nencini resurrecting the claim, demonstrably false, that Raffaele called 112 only after Battistelli's arrival?

Yes, I find meaning in Nencini resurrecting the claim, demonstrably false, that Raffaele called 112 only after Battistelli arrived. It means Nencini twisted falsehood into fact to try to justify the false claim that Raffaele and Amanda were up to no good when they, in fact, we're not.

I wonder if the Italian Supreme Court will blindly accept this and thus open themselves up to ridicule in the media. Would the Italian Supreme Court like the European Court of Human Rights to dissect this publicly?

 

[Poppy1016]

Yes, I find meaning in Nencini resurrecting the claim, demonstrably false, that Raffaele called 112 only after Battistelli arrived. It means Nencini twisted falsehood into fact to try to justify the false claim that Raffaele and Amanda were up to no good when they, in fact, we're not.

I wonder if the Italian Supreme Court will blindly accept this and thus open themselves up to ridicule in the media. Would the Italian Supreme Court like the European Court of Human Rights to dissect this publicly?

I can't see how the Italian Supreme Court can possibly do a thorough and honest review of each of the massive quantity of cases it sees each year.

 

[Desert Fox]

I can't see how the Italian Supreme Court can possibly do a thorough and honest review of each of the massive quantity of cases it sees each year.

While I am skeptical about their numbers (Italy might call homicide as suicide for example), Italy was only suppose to have had 529 murders last year. Never mind, that is still an average of two or three murder cases that the Supreme Court would have to see each day.

 

[RWVBWL]

RandyW

I found your post on the Tramontano incident interesting. The account there seemed rather different from the earlier one though. In one of them, there is a relaxed conversation at the door with Rudy showing the knife and saying he can't get out. In that one CT knows who he is. In the second version, he does not know Rudy and does not help him leave.

I can tell you (I think) why he enters via a window but leaves by the door. It's because it's hard to climb out of window with a laptop under your arm without dropping and breaking it.
<snip>

Hi CW,
Greetings from Los Angeles!
I'm burnt out today, so follow along as you can, ok?

So I too have wondered a bit about that reported CT incident.
That's why I'm diggin' around, and I found some more under-reported info.
I wish Grinder would do the same, instead of bein' so argumentative!

Strangely, the author does write of CT smelling Rudy's boozey breath.
I would speculate that this happened when CT let Rudy outta the flat. For how else did CT smell Rudy's breath? For some reason author Maria D’Elia did not report how Rudy left the flat, nor report about how CT smelled his breath.

I've smelt many a boozy breath before,
esh, I've had to go to court for allegedly defamin' some kooky laywer when I called him a drunk, in public, before. Seemingly hammered, and belligerant, his breath sure stank that day. Mediation was fun, to say the least...

CT had to have been in Rudy's face to smell his breath!

As I said, I'm a dawn patrol kinda guy, so last night was a late one for me.
But that helped me figure out what the ^^^^ was Rudy doin' inside of CT's flat at 6:00 in the mornin'!

Rudy didn't wake up and start enterin' places where he did not belong,
he was simply hammered after a night out dancin', the night club closed, he saw an open window, saw an opportunity as he walked home in the pre-dawn hours to rip off a neighbor, when his rent was due, and he did so! Didn't get nothin' though...


The Spanish story was interesting to translate and then read!
I even forgot to translate the article title because I was surprised at what I had read!!!

I bet Grinder is already castin' doubt on it,
but whatever, he doesn't even believe that Rudy is Rudy, not Rudi,
and he probably thinks I'm Randi, instead of Randy...

And no one has ever really reported what The Spanish saw or thought, right?

As I had to translate quite a few a paragraphs at a time,
and read which one sounded most likely correct of the 3 Spanish to English translations,
I obviously noticed the mention of NO INTERNET connection at the apartment where Rudy and The Spanish Students were staying, and also, more importantly, Rudy's collection of computers that Carolina noticed.

That's an important bit of info,
for how the heck did Rudy, un-employed, get them?
Free donations?
Right...

Keep in mind that Rudy's neighbor,
(I'm quoting Author Nina Burleigh,
whose seemed to be a lil' peeved that some unknown internet crime drama participant
actually kinda forced a fellow JREF debater to email and question her impeccable credentials!)
Ms. Mandu-Diaz knew Rudy casually because when walking her dog,
Rudy was often outside his apartment, trying to get a cell signal.

I wonder if this was when Rudy was using a phone with his SIM card #329.1819627,
which he'd had a long time and that was in his own name?

No Internet connection, no cell phone signals.
Hmmmm...

Burnt out late last night,
I liked the fact that The Spanish were questionin' Rudy's lifetime stories.
I figured a few of you who actually read my posts would dig this bitta info,
and start to ask more questions too!!!

And I knew CodyJuneau would like the Rudy had a cell phone info.
Was it used with the same SIM card # that I posted the other day?
I wonder if Rudy ever called Hekuram Kokomani?

Or Meredith?!?


As Dan O. noted,
it makes a little more sense why Rudy was not interested in Filomena, Laura or Amanda's laptop computers...

This story does indeed bring up many questions,
as does the fact that a couple of Spanish Students were called by ILE to return to Perugia
to answer questions about a phone call from Rudy on Halloween day.

When were they called?
When did they come back to Perugia?
Where is the recording of their statements?
Does Amanda and Raff's Defense even know of this and what they stated?
Why were they not called into Court?

Why did Rudy have so many computers?
Where did he get them from?
What happened to the computers seen in Rudy's bedroom?

Gosh,
I'm sooo burnt out right now,
I soooo wanna dig into this, but the L.A. Clippers are battlin' Oklahoma in the Playoffs right now,
it's 85 to 73 in the 3rd, OK is on top, so I'm gonna bail, turn the game back on and get some shut eye...
See ya,
RW

 

[RandyN]

Sorry RandyN. Frank Sf. may have said this at one time, I don't know about that, but this rationale is taken straight from the motivations report which buttresses the March 2013 reversal of the acquittals.

For me it is yet another reason why Nencini should have acquitted, too. All the evidence his court looked at went the defence's way.... Sample 36i may have been the great unknown, but it is now know.

But there's that other matter that swirls in my tiny brain, none of the motivations reports, not one of them (as mentioned upthread by many) makes mention of the destruction of 165 (the bra clasp) by improper storage. Unlike the knife which IS available for new testing that clasp is gone.

There is no evidence against Raffaele.... literally. Once destroyed the evidence is gone. One of the reasons for locking someone up in preventative detention is to prevent them from tampering with evidence....

.... yet Stefanoni destroys evidence and it doesn't even merit a mention, not even in Hellmann's report.[/QUOTE]



Well I tend to agree with Mach's take on SOP of police and scientists in Italy. They often discard such evidence since the tests have already been done. Of course normal logic tells us that is unsafe and even crazy but it makes perfect Italian "logic".

It is why and how Stefanoni can get away with claiming to have "never had a contamination". Which is impossible BTW. But who can disprove her when the records are gone if there were ever records or even tests in the first place?

I read the rest of Franks article and I hope he is correct about what the ISC has to do now. For me it remains illogical and too concocted to be anything but a hopeful theory. And I was serious before when I mentioned that Frank tried to save Mignini's butt from the fire Mignini himself had set on it. Frank would walk and talk with Mignini in the early months...first when Frank thought the pair were guilty and later when he was certain that they could not be.

Mignini ignored Franks logic and I expect the ISC wont even get his message. Although in the end he is correct that if Italy wants to save anything of its reputation then the last thing they want is for the ECOHR to be picking this case apart on the world stage.

But it could have ended with Nencini if these Italians are so smart as to plan all these devious schemes. That MK virtue is now intact is silly. The Italians never cared about that nor is it even true or logical. Mignini made it up as a weapon to take better swipes at Knox.

I hope Frank is correct and that Nencini will be seen as so blatantly wrong that they have no choice but to overturn...but then what? If another trial that would seem to place the Italians in even a more questionable crazy light.

Frank is trying to rehabilitate the story so that the Italians can seem less corrupt or crazy. No small task. I don't think that so far these people have shown the wisdom to realize that when you are in a hole over your head it may be a good idea to stop digging it deeper.

From what I have seen so far ...I would say that the miners are calling for bigger shovels.

This re-release of the car park video...(see how easy it is to mix up the timing correction? Bill and Tesla both have it exactly 180 degrees like the prosecution did) The clock indicated 12 minutes slower than it actually was so you must add the 12 minutes...not subtract them. But no matter...if this was evidence the prosecution would have used it in court years ago...it is not new...it is old and problem riddled for the prosecution...not so much for the defense. But the point I wished to make about it....it is exactly how the prosecution made its case when the evidence was impossible to use in the courtroom....they simply leaked the spin and in this case rehashed it to the public.

This is not defense trick ...frankly none of them are that clever. This has prosecution prompted leak and story written all over it. What next? The pink bathroom pic right?

Someone asked why no luminol tests in the bathroom. A better question might be why no luminol tests before leaving the crime scene the first time? After a herd of cross contaminating dust mop wearing clowns unrestrained from moving to and from and into any area they pleased had totally contaminated the whole place with blood bits attached to the dust mops...how could it matter what the Luminol showed? Well, I suppose the good thing is that it helped prove no clean up since that would leave an easily identifiable pattern and traces of smears and wipes.

While several wet or damp evidence samples were incorrectly stored UN-dried in plastic bags (paper is the ticket) and yes Stefanoni did state as an excuse that those bags were made in America...that was NOT the case with the bra clasp. This was placed in a large plastic test tube like container. I am uncertain about the truth of any solution being added to that tube w/clasp, but no matter since that container was always the improper vessel. One only needs imagine the sealed mini-gardens we made for 5th grade science fair projects to understand the gross error made by Biondos lab.

Had they tossed that clasp into a paper bag and tossed that in a dry dark area like a closet or whatever then one could go back many years later and retested this item.

This is so basic that no reasonable excuse can cover the reason it is now gone. Storage of DNA evidence is taught at the entry levels...basic well understood methodology. Meanwhile Stephony was bagging stuff and putting it the freezer of the cottage alongside the household frozen food supply. Find that one in the books why don't ya.

The damp samples should be dried and stored in paper. Not frozen while laying on top of the TV dinners and mixed frozen veggies. How many incompetent acts? Or how many corruptions? Too many I would say. But not for Italy...they have this DNA stuff down to their own type of science apparently.

I hear Davids penis is falling off...oh wait... its his ankle that is weak. Poor fellow may topple over in a quake...call out the earthquake guys just in case. Oh that's right...they are still in jail...darn the luck.

 

[anglolawyer]

Hi CW,
Greetings from Los Angeles!
I'm burnt out today, so follow along as you can, ok?

So I too have wondered a bit about that reported CT incident.
That's why I'm diggin' around, and I found some more under-reported info.
I wish Grinder would do the same, instead of bein' so argumentative!

Strangely, the author does write of CT smelling Rudy's boozey breath.
I would speculate that this happened when CT let Rudy outta the flat. For how else did CT smell Rudy's breath? For some reason author Maria D’Elia did not report how Rudy left the flat, nor report about how CT smelled his breath.

I've smelt many a boozy breath before,
esh, I've had to go to court for allegedly defamin' some kooky laywer when I called him a drunk, in public, before. Seemingly hammered, and belligerant, his breath sure stank that day. Mediation was fun, to say the least...

CT had to have been in Rudy's face to smell his breath!

As I said, I'm a dawn patrol kinda guy, so last night was a late one for me.
But that helped me figure out what the ^^^^ was Rudy doin' inside of CT's flat at 6:00 in the mornin'!

Rudy didn't wake up and start enterin' places where he did not belong,
he was simply hammered after a night out dancin', the night club closed, he saw an open window, saw an opportunity as he walked home in the pre-dawn hours to rip off a neighbor, when his rent was due, and he did so! Didn't get nothin' though...


The Spanish story was interesting to translate and then read!
I even forgot to translate the article title because I was surprised at what I had read!!!

I bet Grinder is already castin' doubt on it,
but whatever, he doesn't even believe that Rudy is Rudy, not Rudi,
and he probably thinks I'm Randi, instead of Randy...

And no one has ever really reported what The Spanish saw or thought, right?

As I had to translate quite a few a paragraphs at a time,
and read which one sounded most likely correct of the 3 Spanish to English translations,
I obviously noticed the mention of NO INTERNET connection at the apartment where Rudy and The Spanish Students were staying, and also, more importantly, Rudy's collection of computers that Carolina noticed.

That's an important bit of info,
for how the heck did Rudy, un-employed, get them?
Free donations?
Right...

Keep in mind that Rudy's neighbor,
(I'm quoting Author Nina Burleigh,
whose seemed to be a lil' peeved that some unknown internet crime drama participant
actually kinda forced a fellow JREF debater to email and question her impeccable credentials!)
Ms. Mandu-Diaz knew Rudy casually because when walking her dog,
Rudy was often outside his apartment, trying to get a cell signal.

I wonder if this was when Rudy was using a phone with his SIM card #329.1819627,
which he'd had a long time and that was in his own name?

No Internet connection, no cell phone signals.
Hmmmm...

Burnt out late last night,
I liked the fact that The Spanish were questionin' Rudy's lifetime stories.
I figured a few of you who actually read my posts would dig this bitta info,
and start to ask more questions too!!!

And I knew CodyJuneau would like the Rudy had a cell phone info.
Was it used with the same SIM card # that I posted the other day?
I wonder if Rudy ever called Hekuram Kokomani?

Or Meredith?!?


As Dan O. noted,
it makes a little more sense why Rudy was not interested in Filomena, Laura or Amanda's laptop computers...

This story does indeed bring up many questions,
as does the fact that a couple of Spanish Students were called by ILE to return to Perugia
to answer questions about a phone call from Rudy on Halloween day.

When were they called?
When did they come back to Perugia?
Where is the recording of their statements?
Does Amanda and Raff's Defense even know of this and what they stated?
Why were they not called into Court?

Why did Rudy have so many computers?
Where did he get them from?
What happened to the computers seen in Rudy's bedroom?

Gosh,
I'm sooo burnt out right now,
I soooo wanna dig into this, but the L.A. Clippers are battlin' Oklahoma in the Playoffs right now,
it's 85 to 73 in the 3rd, OK is on top, so I'm gonna bail, turn the game back on and get some shut eye...
See ya,
RW

you called a lawyer a drunk? Man, we are totally through thru! Don't be too tough on Grinder either. He gets enough grief from me.

Some great questions there. The computers at Rudy's place is new info. His telephone records would be great to see. I would like to see all the stuff you mentioned plus some dates. When were the Spanish guys contacted and hooked back? When did the cops first access Rudy's phone records?

Btw. what are the LA 'Clippers'? Is that a hairdressing team, or are we talking about professional tea importing?

 

[Planigale]

you called a lawyer a drunk? Man, we are totally through thru! Don't be too tough on Grinder either. He gets enough grief from me.

Some great questions there. The computers at Rudy's place is new info. His telephone records would be great to see. I would like to see all the stuff you mentioned plus some dates. When were the Spanish guys contacted and hooked back? When did the cops first access Rudy's phone records?

Btw. what are the LA 'Clippers'? Is that a hairdressing team, or are we talking about professional tea importing?

Competitive coiffure this does sound like a californian sport. Go Sacramento Stylists.

 

[Samson]

you called a lawyer a drunk? Man, we are totally through thru! Don't be too tough on Grinder either. He gets enough grief from me.

Some great questions there. The computers at Rudy's place is new info. His telephone records would be great to see. I would like to see all the stuff you mentioned plus some dates. When were the Spanish guys contacted and hooked back? When did the cops first access Rudy's phone records?

Btw. what are the LA 'Clippers'? Is that a hairdressing team, or are we talking about professional tea importing?

That's odd I read it months ago and assumed it was common knowledge with the old timers. Grinder would never admit it to evidence I'm sure.
The stolen laptops in Milan prove he stole them from Perugia himself by a very high probability indeed. Perugia 160,000, Milan 1,200,000. Two Perugians meet per chance in Milan, no realistic chance. I expect he stole plenty more in Milan if his room was that well stocked.

 

[anglolawyer]

That's odd I read it months ago and assumed it was common knowledge with the old timers. Grinder would never admit it to evidence I'm sure.
The stolen laptops in Milan prove he stole them from Perugia himself by a very high probability indeed. Perugia 160,000, Milan 1,200,000. Two Perugians meet per chance in Milan, no realistic chance. I expect he stole plenty more in Milan if his room was that well stocked.

Maybe it's only news to me

 

[Samson]

Maybe it's only news to me

I bet Nencini knew

 

[Dan O.]

It wouldn't matter. It's not like Amanda hasn't carried a bag in her left hand once. It means nothing. You can't make out the picture and I bet if 80 percent of the public saw the pictures side by side with Amanda they are not going to believe it is Amanda.

First, why is this one photo out of a continuous video? Where are the other frames and where is the time stamp? This isn't valid evidence of anything.

I recall there was already one fake photo attempted to be pushed off as a CCTV image that was taken from near the CCTV camera. The author had intended only to show a better resolution of the scene but some guilters weren't bright enough to see the difference.

Before even considering if this might be Amanda. We need to demand to see proof of it's origin and chain of custody. I make the same demand of evidence of innocence.


Second, is there sufficient resolution of identifiable features to make a valid identification? We should be able to measure the image resolution in relation to the size of the identifiable features and estimate the exposure of those features. Then using those numbers, create similar images of a number of random subjects and test how well people are actually able to identify the subjects.

Confirmation bias is a large part of visual identification. Once people have been shown the image and been told that it is Amanda, they are more likely to believe that they can actually see Amanda in the image. This reminds me of those power point presentations of Kermit that purport to be unbiased but always tell the viewer what they are suposed to see before getting to the image.

 

[Samson]

Here are more pictures of Amanda with bags, all on the right shoulder again, all different. Except one. In this picture the bag is on her left shoulder, but her boyfriend James in this one is holding her tightly from the right.
She will have extricated the bag from discomfort and replaced it to the left shoulder.

That is 15 out of sixteen different situations, different bags where she uses the right shoulder, and the 16th is explained by special circumstance. Yet the CCTV camera of the 8 53 shot shows a bag on a left shoulder. I see this as complete proof that she has once more been done like a dinner by the appalling media, by Nancy Grace, and by the hate sites, who even when sceptical, love the idea it has gone viral as another busted alibi.
There is a vanishingly small logical possibility the picture is Amanda.

This is a pedantic exercise but compelling in its conclusion.
.
https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a....php%3Ff%3D1%26t%3D508%26start%3D4550;478;269

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...ames-Terrano-returns-normal-life.html;306;474


https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...manda-knox-slammed-partying-eve-88940;610;745

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...ito-breaks-silence-We-need-other.html;306;423

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...Famanda-knox-steps-out-smiling-277955;610;858

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...ial-hell-left-me-broke-and-broken%2F;1200;760

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...%2Fee%2Findex.php%3F%2Ftjmk%2FC440%2F;702;833

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=a...-as-she-prepares-for-her-first-282388;615;409

 

[carbonjam72]

First, why is this one photo out of a continuous video? Where are the other frames and where is the time stamp? This isn't valid evidence of anything.

I recall there was already one fake photo attempted to be pushed off as a CCTV image that was taken from near the CCTV camera. The author had intended only to show a better resolution of the scene but some guilters weren't bright enough to see the difference.

Before even considering if this might be Amanda. We need to demand to see proof of it's origin and chain of custody. I make the same demand of evidence of innocence.

Second, is there sufficient resolution of identifiable features to make a valid identification? We should be able to measure the image resolution in relation to the size of the identifiable features and estimate the exposure of those features. Then using those numbers, create similar images of a number of random subjects and test how well people are actually able to identify the subjects.

Confirmation bias is a large part of visual identification. Once people have been shown the image and been told that it is Amanda, they are more likely to believe that they can actually see Amanda in the image. This reminds me of those power point presentations of Kermit that purport to be unbiased but always tell the viewer what they are suposed to see before getting to the image.

First point, evidence is just evidence. It's either legit or it isn't. Whether it can be helpful to prosecution of defense is irrelevant, right?

Second point - facial recognition is one form of biometric analysis. But professional digital analysis also entails taking specific measurements of the real world objects that are on display in the photo, for example; the sidewalk, the street, railings, and so on. By taking these measurements, the zoom of the lens can be determined, and the biometric data of the individual can be determined with greater specificity.

That's not just how tall are they, but how broad across the shoulders, what is the length of the shoulder to the elbow, elbow to wrist, hands and finger length if possible, torso, legs to knee, short legs long legs, etc. There is a whole wealth of data that can be used to include/exclude a person suspect from a person depicted in a photograph. Any distinctive tattoos, clothing or hair style, and so on.

Point is, taking a simple gander at a single still doesn't tell you much, unless its obvious not to be the same person (by the way, I think CNN has multiple images from the same clip). By my eye, there's no way its Amanda. And as a factual matter, it can't be - if we believe that they never left Raf's apt, and there is no reason to believe they did - notwithstanding this contrivance.

However one thing I did notice, on I think the Daily Mail site; they had resized the photo to make the Amanda and mystery person appear to be the same size on the page. Mystery person image had clearly been zoomed, and the photo selected for comparison had the feet in the closest position possible to create the appearance of similarity in both size and body position.

That type of presentation is inherently deceptive, so WELL DONE BRITS! Once again you have distinguished yourselves as craven crazed 'guilters' baying at the moon like rabid wolves. (Apologies to all our non-rabid Brit friends, but let's face it, Italy and the UK have a perception issue on this case).

 

[Dan O.]

If someone (like the Perugia police) really wanted to know who this person was they would look at the rest of the tape and see who's cars leave that parking structure shortly after this person entered. The drivers could then be interviewed to find which entrance they walked in and what they were wearing. But this would be looking for exculpatory evidence and Mignini would have none of it.

 

[anglolawyer]

If someone (like the Perugia police) really wanted to know who this person was they would look at the rest of the tape and see who's cars leave that parking structure shortly after this person entered. The drivers could then be interviewed to find which entrance they walked in and what they were wearing. But this would be looking for exculpatory evidence and Mignini would have none of it.

There is nothing to suggest this picture is part of the case at all, whether for or against her. It is as much evidence as the Channel 5 climb - namely zilch. Anyway, it's clearly not her a fact which, by Italian standards, ought to lead to the instant dismissal of all charges

 

[Kestrel]

If someone (like the Perugia police) really wanted to know who this person was they would look at the rest of the tape and see who's cars leave that parking structure shortly after this person entered. The drivers could then be interviewed to find which entrance they walked in and what they were wearing. But this would be looking for exculpatory evidence and Mignini would have none of it.

The cottage is right across the street from the parking structure. Interviewing the drivers that entered or exited the parking structure around the time of the murder would be as important as interviewing the neighbors.

 

[JREF2010]

If someone (like the Perugia police) really wanted to know who this person was they would look at the rest of the tape and see who's cars leave that parking structure shortly after this person entered. The drivers could then be interviewed to find which entrance they walked in and what they were wearing. But this would be looking for exculpatory evidence and Mignini would have none of it.

great point. or if you wanted to slander and frame someone you would clip it and leak it, so the video would resemble the person you wanted to frame.

 

[Grinder]

What a strange way to put it. This is what comes of spending too long on a bat-**** crazy Italian case. Try this:

The two of them spent the night together at Raffaele's place. The problem is that the absence of a single spec of reliable or credible evidence to the contrary is insufficient in Italy's upside-down system.

I was referring to having one innocent and the other guilty.

 

[Grinder]

It's a nice idea, but it isn't going to happen. Really tough to sue the media. You have to prove that the writers wrote with malice and knew what they were writing was demonstrably wrong when they wrote it. Vogt and Barbeau can easily fall back that they were just printing what the Italian authorities told them.

The malice only applies to public figures.

Actual malice in United States law is a condition required to establish libel against public officials or public figures and is defined as "knowledge that the information was false" or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." Reckless disregard does not encompass mere neglect in following professional standards of fact checking. The publisher must entertain actual doubt as to the statement's truth. This is the definition in only the United States and came from the landmark 1964 lawsuit New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, which ruled that public officials needed to prove actual malice in order to recover damages for libel.
​