Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[LondonJohn]

We have a resident Italian lawyer? Elsewhere, I was referred to a revision of the code apparently conferring immunity from suit for diffumazione - it might have been article 587 or something like that - which left me puzzled about the slander claim against Amanda which, I think, resulted from evidence she gave in court.

Btw. the case against Edda Mellas for repeating what Amanda said continues in Florence, as a point of interest.

Maybe Mach can enlighten us because it's concerning that Stefanoni's clear and flagrant lies were not properly exposed. I thought maybe the reason might be that Italian does not confer immunity even on judges.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were still no privilege attached to accusations made in courts in Italy. Undoubtedly under the Fascist-era codes it would have been possible to commit these sorts of offences: they are an important tool in ensuring that the courts come to the "correct" decisions to the pleasure of the dictator. It's not unlikely therefore that this is one of the many areas of the Italian criminal justice system that either has not been properly reformed at all, or has been subjected to a clumsy partial reform.

The whole issue of post-Fascism reform of the criminal justice system is, so far as I can see, huge. In my view, the way it's been done (and not done, and not done properly) has rendered the system unfit for purpose. One fundamental (and understandable) problem is that criminal justice systems, by their very nature, must be somewhat reactionary and "set in stone" if they are to be accepted by the people - if laws and codes are constantly changing, it pretty much destroys faith in the system and - more importantly - a willingness to live within the system.

However, it's abundantly clear to me that by now a great deal more should have been done, and done properly, to modernise and democratise the system in Italy. I strongly suspect that there have been - and probably still are - powerful forces within the system that have actively resisted change. People often don't like giving up power easily, especially where they are in some position to have a say over the preservation of that power.....

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Adam Scott, negative controls, and DNA contamination

I have been reading up on the Adam Scott case. Despite having a solid alibi, Mr. Scott spent several months on remand. This is the only case of DNA contamination that comes to mind in which the route of contamination can be specified. There are some troubling points, of which I will deal with only one today, namely that the negative control result was not investigated further. "The batch containing the rape sample showed DNA present in the negative control (a blank sample put through to test for contamination). This was not sufficiently dealt with and resulted in an incorrect conclusion; it was a missed opportunity to identify the true extent of the problem."

If Stefanoni had actually deposited negative controls in 2008, everyone would have them by now. Her claim that she did so may have been an understandable lapse of memory, but there is no reason why she cannot deposit them now, and in their proper electronic form. My point is that one cannot count on the laboratory in question to investigate a positive result in the negative control; that is why absolutely unfettered discovery is necessary.
EDT
In the Gary Leiterman case there also may have been some indications of contamination that were not disclosed. That is what I recall at least from the report of Dr. Theodore Kessis.

 

[codyjuneau]

It looks like a legal system that is basically out of control. The US legal system has some pretty bad decisions but seems more or less localized.
I suspect that with the controversy involving this case as well, most US courts would find some way too just sweep the case under the rug - maybe just call the case on some legal technicality.

Edit: That Amanda can keep studying and even getting honors in school is astounding. That shows some strength of character because I think many, if not most people, would have crumbled at this point in time.

Amen. People don't realise the drip, drip pressure of these prolonged cases. People have their breaking points.

.
The people responsible for this injustice, and their supporters, deserve some 'what goes around, comes around' justice:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yootoZMCCOM

Cody
.

 

[Kaosium]

Is there a link to the letter Rudy wrote and Mignini read as I recall he did call them the murderers.

TJMK used to have it, and it ends something to the effect of 'that sweet angel Meredith was murdered by Raffaele and Amanda like the judges and people decided.' He doesn't change his story, it's like Amanda or Raffaele saying on their blog (if they ever did--dunno) that it was Rudy.

Knox broke down at her appeal hearing after Rudy Guede, 24, said she was responsible for the death of the exchange student. "He knows that we were not there, he knows that we have nothing to do with this," Knox said.The testimony by Guede, an immigrant from the Ivory Coast, was closely watched in the packed courtroom in Perugia.
He had been called as a witness for the prosecution in the appeal trial of Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, her Italian ex-boyfriend and co-defendant.
He spoke after two of Guede's fellow prison inmates, child killer Mario Alessi and mobster Luciano Aviello, told the hearing that Guede had said Knox and Sollecito, 27, had nothing to do with the murder. Guede denied ever discussing the matter with Alessi.
....


Knox looked intently at Guede as he spoke just a few feet away from her in the packed courtroom. In the letter Guede had said: "Everything I want to say I have told the court and my lawyers. Do you think if I had anything to say I would speak with a child killer?"
After Guede had finished his testimony, Knox stood up and said: "The first time that Rudy Guede, Raffaele and I were all together in the same space was in a court room. We have never been in contact. I am shocked and anguished, truly, by what he says."
Sollecito was also granted permission to speak and said: "Guede has never seen me before in his life, not even fleetingly, I don't know how he can say I was with Amanda Knox."

interesting wording by Raf.

Thus they (the prosecution) get the benefit of Rudy making the charge--which Raffaele and Amanda responded to--without actually making it or exposing himself to cross examination or charges. Clever, huh?

 

[Grinder]

TJMK used to have it, and it ends something to the effect of 'that sweet angel Meredith was murdered by Raffaele and Amanda like the judges and people decided.' He doesn't change his story, it's like Amanda or Raffaele saying on their blog (if they ever did--dunno) that it was Rudy.



Thus they (the prosecution) get the benefit of Rudy making the charge--which Raffaele and Amanda responded to--without actually making it or exposing himself to cross examination or charges. Clever Outrageous, huh?

I corrected it for you

 

[Bill Williams]

We have a resident Italian lawyer? Elsewhere, I was referred to a revision of the code apparently conferring immunity from suit for diffumazione - it might have been article 587 or something like that - which left me puzzled about the slander claim against Amanda which, I think, resulted from evidence she gave in court.

Btw. the case against Edda Mellas for repeating what Amanda said continues in Florence, as a point of interest.
Maybe Mach can enlighten us because it's concerning that Stefanoni's clear and flagrant lies were not properly exposed. I thought maybe the reason might be that Italian does not confer immunity even on judges.

Edda faces three years in jail for a piece John Follain wrote for The Telegraph, in which Follain quotes both Edda and Curt.

Can anyone think of another defamation/libel case where both the author and publisher of the piece are not co-named as co-defendants?

Given the free-pass John Follain continually gave the Mignini-led prosecution, this is perhaps the most naked of Mignini's predatory prosecutions.

How do guilters account for Follain and The Telegraph being left out of this one?

 

[acbytesla]

I have been reading a lot about Robin Williams the last couple of days, and I couldn't help but read about about how his daughter as given up social media because of trolls who can't stop themselves from being cruel.

I have to wonder if Amanda and Raffaele feel the same way. I know that a lot of these idiots who write these things are people who's lives are pathetic and only in being cruel can they escape their own lives. It makes you wonder just how bad their lives are that makes them act so horribly?

 

[acbytesla]

Edda faces three years in jail for a piece John Follain wrote for The Telegraph, in which Follain quotes both Edda and Curt.

Can anyone think of another defamation/libel case where both the author and publisher of the piece are not co-named as co-defendants?

Given the free-pass John Follain continually gave the Mignini-led prosecution, this is perhaps the most naked of Mignini's predatory prosecutions.

How do guilters account for Follain and The Telegraph being left out of this one?

What has happened to that case Bill? I have been under the impression that it is dying a slow death and will never actually go to trial.

 

[carbonjam72]

Yes, I think so, because fingerprint matching is an acknowledged science, not a developmental one. The prosecution might want to use the print as merely corroborative rather than directly probative. Nothing wrong with that. It's not for the judge to filter the crown's case in that way.

The bathmat print cannot be directly matched to Guede but it is also not incompatible with his print, so it is a small item of circumstantial value of some, but not much, weight. It would be wrong for the judge to disallow it.

Of course, judges still retain the power (here anyway) to throw a case out at 'half-time' on a submission of 'no case to answer'. That is, the defence may submit at the close of the prosecution case that the evidence does not discharge the evidential burden and that there is no need for the defendant to answer it. Extreme example: if you tried to prove Guede did it solely by reference to the bathmat print the case would surely be chucked out without reaching the jury. In our system, such a decision is for the judge alone. But s/he is not ruling the evidence inadmissible, just inadequate.

Same in the US, judges can direct an acquittal.

Thats what I think/hope will happen here. Annulling the convictions, and dismissing the charges on the basis of a lack of evidence - that no court could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, once you discount the DNA of the knife and bra clasp, and bar Amanda's statements. All that's left is the word of Guede and Curatolo, and 'circumstantial evidence' consistent with Amanda and Raf never leaving Rafs apt.

 

[carbonjam72]

I have a question: if Hellman had said Stefanoni was a liar, rather than that she had an understandable lapse of memory, could he have been prosecuted for calumny or anything else?

Charges for Hellman or Stefanoni?

Could be everyone is gun-shy and no one wants to create a potential cause of action.

I think Hellman knew his decision would make enemies and be publicly unpopular. I think he had courage. But the calumnia charge shows that not even Hellman could just rely on the truth.

Italy's courts are a god damn mess.

 

[carbonjam72]

What has happened to that case Bill? I have been under the impression that it is dying a slow death and will never actually go to trial.

I heard that too. When it got moved out of Perugia to Florence, it all but guaranteed the case would expire due to statute of limitations.

Another reason I believe ISC is heading towards acquittal for AK/RS. They want this over with.

 

[Bill Williams]

What has happened to that case Bill? I have been under the impression that it is dying a slow death and will never actually go to trial.

I haven't a clue. Your guess is as good as mine... however, the defamation charge against Edda and Curt - with no mention of John Follain or The Telegraph - is the most naked predatory prosecution Mignini engineered. It served notice to Edda and Curt that if you piss off Mignini, you'll never be able to enter Italy again to see her. Mignini would stop at nothing to harass that family.

My guess? It will never get to court. Then again, I've been wrong about everything else....

 

[acbytesla]

I heard that too. When it got moved out of Perugia to Florence, it all but guaranteed the case would expire due to statute of limitations.

Another reason I believe ISC is heading towards acquittal for AK/RS. They want this over with.

I'm not sure I would go that far CJ. There is a principle of law (at least in the US) that the enforcement of law is not arbitrary or capricious. Clearly, the charging of Amanda's parents in this case is both. While I imagine that this is the big reason that the case against Amanda's parents will not actually be tried, I'm not sure we can believe that it follows that the case against Amanda and Raffaele will follow the same path. I thought as you did when the case went to the ISC before so I'm done making those kind of predictions.

 

[acbytesla]

I haven't a clue. Your guess is as good as mine... however, the defamation charge against Edda and Curt - with no mention of John Follain or The Telegraph - is the most naked predatory prosecution Mignini engineered. It served notice to Edda and Curt that if you piss off Mignini, you'll never be able to enter Italy again to see her. Mignini would stop at nothing to harass that family.
My guess? It will never get to court. Then again, I've been wrong about everything else....

I mostly agree with the first paragraph. It was a shot across the bow. Although I don't think Mignini will pick on Amanda's parents ever again. I have been wrong many times before, but I can't imagine Mignini wants to even peripherally mentioned again with this case if he can avoid it.

 

[Samson]

I haven't a clue. Your guess is as good as mine... however, the defamation charge against Edda and Curt - with no mention of John Follain or The Telegraph - is the most naked predatory prosecution Mignini engineered. It served notice to Edda and Curt that if you piss off Mignini, you'll never be able to enter Italy again to see her. Mignini would stop at nothing to harass that family.

My guess? It will never get to court. Then again, I've been wrong about everything else....

I have seen the anguish in parents of convicted murderers, not much different to those of victims. Loss everywhere, and this attack by Mignini is yet a further expression of the unmitigated evil he represents.

 

[griffinmill]

I believe Rudy Guede will meet an unfortunate end sometime after he is released, courtesy of the Italian police. Not right away, but maybe a year later. He's too much of a loose canon. They'll give him a chance to keep up his end, but when he starts to wobble, first sign of trouble, I think they'll give him a 'curatolo' send off.

There's no way they are letting Rudy Guede hang around to implicate the prosecution and police. Which he will have to offer to do the next time he's caught with a dead girl. He has black outs and wanders away at night miles from his home. He pleasured himself over a dying woman he had mortally wounded moments earlier. He has serious mental issues, he can't control himself. They are nuts to let him out of an institution to roam free.

But one way or another, Rudy Guede will never be on trial for murder/rape again, no matter who he kills or rapes - imo -

I know these views don't represent most people here, but this made me laugh.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The HemaTrace test has a lower limit of detection of 0.07 µg Hb per mL

Here are two more quotes from the article by Castro and Coyle: "The standard forensic science practice at the crime scene is for the investigator to perform a minimum of a presumptive blood identification test during the evidentiary collection process. The traditional standard forensic science practice in the forensic science laboratory is for the scientist to repeat the presumptive test for blood; then confirm the sample as human blood prior to continuing on to a DNA test [2-15]. Recently, some forensic science laboratories have created a short cut in their procedures by eliminating the human blood confirmation test. In some case circumstances, this can create interpretational and legal difficulties and is not a favored approach by the authors [16-19]. Current advances in human blood identification allow for investigators and laboratories to confirm the human specificity of the blood sample within minutes [20]." (highlighting mine)

"Compared to the Ouchterlony technique discussed above, the ABAcard HemaTrace is far more sensitive, rapid and tolerant to different evidence conditions taking only ten minutes to perform and read the results [56, 59]. One study showed a positive result in a liquid blood sample diluted 1 in 1,000,000 ppm [57]."

No wonder Virkler and Lednev were so unimpressed with the quality of evidence put forth in this case.

 

[griffinmill]

Here are two more quotes from the article by Castro and Coyle: "The standard forensic science practice at the crime scene is for the investigator to perform a minimum of a presumptive blood identification test during the evidentiary collection process. The traditional standard forensic science practice in the forensic science laboratory is for the scientist to repeat the presumptive test for blood; then confirm the sample as human blood prior to continuing on to a DNA test [2-15]. Recently, some forensic science laboratories have created a short cut in their procedures by eliminating the human blood confirmation test. In some case circumstances, this can create interpretational and legal difficulties and is not a favored approach by the authors [16-19]. Current advances in human blood identification allow for investigators and laboratories to confirm the human specificity of the blood sample within minutes [20]." (highlighting mine)

"Compared to the Ouchterlony technique discussed above, the ABAcard HemaTrace is far more sensitive, rapid and tolerant to different evidence conditions taking only ten minutes to perform and read the results [56, 59]. One study showed a positive result in a liquid blood sample diluted 1 in 1,000,000 ppm [57]."

No wonder Virkler and Lednev were so unimpressed with the quality of evidence put forth in this case.

Not sure how we can know what Virkler and Lednev felt about the case without being able to read the full interview, which only you have access to, but ok.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

My interview with Dr. Virkler and Professor Lednev

Here were my questions (asked via email):

"1. Is DNA profiling not a confirmatory test for blood, and if so, why not? The only reason that I can think of is that one might detect DNA from any tissue.

2. If these tests (luminol, TMB, and DNA profiling) were the only tests done, what should one conclude about the luminol-positive footprints?"

Dr. Lednev indicated in his email that he and Kelly Virkler had discussed the matter and that this was a joint answer:

"-TMB can give a false negative if the blood is too aged or diluted, and other substances like acids or reduction compounds can interfere.

-On the other hand, Luminol can give a false positive with things such as bleach, Drano, and plant products. This would explain why there was no DNA found.

-Some luminol formulations can also damage DNA, so this might be a factor.

-So, there was either no blood and the luminol was wrong, or there was blood and the TMB had interference and the luminol damaged the DNA. We think it is more likely that there was no blood, and that the luminol was reacting with something else, possibly plant matter from the bottom of the shoes causing the footprints (the intensity of the luminol reaction might give some more insight). The prosecution should have used much more convincing evidence to prove the presence of blood.

It is correct to assume that DNA profiling is not a confirmatory test for blood because it can be found in so many other things. Just confirming the presence of the victim or suspect's DNA has absolutely no bearing on what type of tissue or fluid it is. There could have been skin cells scattered in a pile of ketchup that would match a person's DNA, but that doesn't make it blood. However, as outlined in our review (Forensic Sci. International 2009), there are several new mRNA based tests that CAN specify a body fluid based on certain markers, and some can even simultaneously compare DNA profiles."

 

[acbytesla]

I know these views don't represent most people here, but this made me laugh.

Actually Griffin, I don't buy CJ's theory here either. I think Rudy is a loose cannon, but I think he is safe because nobody believes him anyway.