Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

The intent is the same Grinder. To convict a suspect based on phony evidence. The fact that they might be guilty is incidental and you just got lucky that they were actually guilty.

Tell you what Grinder. Do a Google search on "framing a guilty man" and get back to us. You will find a quarter of a million hits.

Find a few dictionaries that define it your way.

As a wise man said, you can find anything on the Internet except a dictionary that defines frame the way you do.

ETA - did your Google and it was 23,700 and 22,750 were linked to JREF. Okay the first part is true.

 

[Grinder]

It is baffling why the distinctions being drawn are at all important. Esp. to this case.

Then again, these sorts of diversions break out when there is otherwise nothing of substance at the fore.

Perhaps it's just biding our time until Section 5 of Cassazione decides on whether or not to reference this to the United Sections.

Please fill us in.

But Bill language is important and in your studies people argue over words all the time.

I explain precisely why if someone says the kids were framed that it means very different things if they are thought to be innocent rather than guilty.

My opinion is that Mignini and crew certainly thought she was guilty at the beginning and may still.

 

[Grinder]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/frame

a : to devise falsely (as a criminal charge)
b : to contrive the evidence against (an innocent person) so that a verdict of guilty is assured

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/frame

INFORMAL Produce false evidence against (an innocent person) so that they appear guilty:
he claims he was framed
Now what would that mean

Googles "he was framed" - 348,000 results

framed innocent -10,300,000 results

"framed by the police" innocent - 8,830,000

 

[Grinder]

DF your link is to the same source as Chris' - yours is the guys site and Chris's is to an article quoting him

Although the deaths of Charles and Taylor and the subsequent conviction of Hughes might appear a simple tale of prey and predator, the truth is far more complicated, says John Allen, a Cali*fornia-based blogger better known in cyberspace as The Skeptical Juror. Allen is adamant not only that Hughes is innocent, but also that he was framed by members of the Houston police, who planted evidence in his apartment; by the police crime lab, whose scientists did scant testing of the evidence; and by a deputy medical examiner who bent over backward during Hughes' trial to bolster the state's theory of the crime. Allen has written more than 60 stories about the case, and he charges that Hughes has never had defense counsel do enough on his behalf. "It shouldn't be this way," says Allen.
If Houston police did indeed corrupt the process, it may be quite difficult to determine whether Hughes is guilty or innocent. According to the New York-based Innocence Project, government misconduct is a leading cause of wrongful convictions. Equally problematic is when otherwise well-meaning police attempt, in effect, to "frame the guilty" – or those they believe to be guilty – thereby tainting legitimate evidence of guilt. In those circumstances, how can the system determine who should be punished – or in capital cases, deserve to die?

While they have a catchy headline - Framing the Guilty? the guys main point is that the man is innocent - he claims the police planted evidence thinking he was guilty and a guy that call himself the "The Skeptical Juror" and I'm beginning to wonder if he posts here

 

[Bill Williams]

My opinion is that Mignini and crew certainly thought she was guilty at the beginning and may still.

That's my opinion as well. I believe there's reason to think that Raffaele was framed when the Nike evidence did not pan out.

They simply could not lose Raffaele.

 

[carbonjam72]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/frame

a : to devise falsely (as a criminal charge)b : to contrive the evidence against (an innocent person) so that a verdict of guilty is assured

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/frame

INFORMAL Produce false evidence against (an innocent person) so that they appear guilty:
he claims he was framed
Now what would that mean

Googles "he was framed" - 348,000 results

framed innocent -10,300,000 results

"framed by the police" innocent - 8,830,000

The lead definition in the cite you provided appears to accommodate all of the interpretations people have used on these boards. I don't see any controversy.
The real issue is what happened. Did the police/Mignini/Napoleone/Ficcara/Finzi and all the rest; did they fudge the line? Did they do anything crooked or shady?

Did they frame two college students? Did they know the two students were innocent or were likely innocent while they were doing it?

Do the Italian police see anything wrong with this type of case building - first pick a suspect(s), then find evidence to support your claims, and suppress or destroy any conflicting evidence.

 

[carbonjam72]

I have literally no idea why it's so important to have two different definitions of the same word for this discussion. It's not like other words are inadequate.

"Wrongful conviction" and "planting of evidence" are perfectly sufficient to describe what may have happened, without blurring the lines between the likely scenario and the Guede-as-informant conspiracy theory, for which there is little evidence (at least that we know of).

If you were to go around saying "Amanda was framed" outside this thread, you know perfectly well that people would assume that meant the actual definition of framed, rather than the completely unnecessary redefinition of the word, which just means the same as wrongfully accused / convicted anyway.

I'm satisfied Rudy was an informant for the Perugians, because of Steve Moore's explanation, and Bob Graham's interview where Graham reports Mignini himself in essence concedes Rudy was working as an informant. (While not explaining though why Mignini never prosecuted Guede for his burglaries in Perugia).

If we're not accepting the same basis of fact, then its not really possible to build arguments from facts that haven't been mutually accepted.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

corruptions

Thanks for proving my point.

Besides proving my point, it is a case from which one can learn a bit. I don't know for certain whether Preston was factually innocent or guilty, but I am convinced that the police engaged in unethical behavior. However, I am happy to use a different term for framing those who are thought to be guilty, such as calling it "goosing a case" or a type of "noble cause corruption."

When the word "its" is a possessive, it does not get an apostrophe. When "it's" is a contraction of "it is," it does get an apostrophe.ETA
1. a conspiracy to incriminate someone on a false charge
2. a plot to bring about a dishonest result, as in a contest

From the Collins English Dictionary via this link.

 

[Desert Fox]

DF your link is to the same source as Chris' - yours is the guys site and Chris's is to an article quoting him

Although the deaths of Charles and Taylor and the subsequent conviction of Hughes might appear a simple tale of prey and predator, the truth is far more complicated, says John Allen, a Cali*fornia-based blogger better known in cyberspace as The Skeptical Juror. Allen is adamant not only that Hughes is innocent, but also that he was framed by members of the Houston police, who planted evidence in his apartment; by the police crime lab, whose scientists did scant testing of the evidence; and by a deputy medical examiner who bent over backward during Hughes' trial to bolster the state's theory of the crime. Allen has written more than 60 stories about the case, and he charges that Hughes has never had defense counsel do enough on his behalf. "It shouldn't be this way," says Allen.
If Houston police did indeed corrupt the process, it may be quite difficult to determine whether Hughes is guilty or innocent. According to the New York-based Innocence Project, government misconduct is a leading cause of wrongful convictions. Equally problematic is when otherwise well-meaning police attempt, in effect, to "frame the guilty" – or those they believe to be guilty – thereby tainting legitimate evidence of guilt. In those circumstances, how can the system determine who should be punished – or in capital cases, deserve to die?

While they have a catchy headline - Framing the Guilty? the guys main point is that the man is innocent - he claims the police planted evidence thinking he was guilty and a guy that call himself the "The Skeptical Juror" and I'm beginning to wonder if he posts here

I you Google the term "frame the guilty," you get pages of hits. Don't like the term, alright but I don't think we are getting anywhere.

 

[carbonjam72]

... It won't be going to the United Sections, that's why the case has been assigned to Section 5. ...

There seems to be a misunderstanding on this point.

Does section 5 decide whether to have a 'united sections' hearing, or does the fact that section 5 have the case mean a 'united sections' hearing has been denied?

I read on IIP, that a united sections panel has 9 judges, whereas a section 5 panel would have 5 judges. And that section 5 now has to decide whether to grant a 'united sections' panel, which makes more sense. Someone has to make that decision, how could it not be known who would decide?

My guess is supercal is mistaken on this point.

It does seem like this is a big deal which ever way it goes.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/frame

a : to devise falsely (as a criminal charge)b : to contrive the evidence against (an innocent person) so that a verdict of guilty is assured

The lead definition in the cite you provided appears to accommodate all of the interpretations people have used on these boards. I don't see any controversy.
The real issue is what happened. Did the police/Mignini/Napoleone/Ficcara/Finzi and all the rest; did they fudge the line? Did they do anything crooked or shady?

Did they frame two college students? Did they know the two students were innocent or were likely innocent while they were doing it?

Do the Italian police see anything wrong with this type of case building - first pick a suspect(s), then find evidence to support your claims, and suppress or destroy any conflicting evidence.

-

Good catch CJ.

I personally believe that Mignini somewhat believes their guilty, but I don't discount the fact that somewhere deep inside one of the closets of his brain, he has doubt.

It's just that no matter how much doubt prosecutors have, they can NEVER NEVER reveal it. If the jury confirms what they believe (guilt), they feel that their doubts have also been proven wrong or something like that.

Maybe he felt that if he's able to frame the innocent, that proves in his perverted mind that they are not innocent,

d

-

 

[Supercalifragilistic]

In case anyone else hasn't yet got the message:

The fact that section 5 have the case does mean a 'united sections' hearing has been denied.


I hope that's clear now. Sorry to be annoyingly "superior" etc, but that's what comes from possession of the facts. Sorry to bring bad news for you, but you know, don't shoot the messenger.

 

[carbonjam72]

-


-

Good catch CJ.

I personally believe that Mignini somewhat believes their guilty, but I don't discount the fact that somewhere deep inside one of the closets of his brain, he has doubt.

It's just that no matter how much doubt prosecutors have, they can NEVER NEVER reveal it. If the jury confirms what they believe (guilt), they feel that their doubts have also been proven wrong or something like that.

Maybe he felt that if he's able to frame the innocent, that proves in his perverted mind that they are not innocent,

d

-

In Candace Dempsey's book, she related that after Amanda spoke in her own defense at the end of her first trial, maresca left the room before she spoke, and Mignini left the room afterwards. Amanda's eleven year old sister happened to be outside the courthouse door as Mignini came out, and she said he was crying. Mignini later claimed he was sweating and only went into the bathroom to splash some water on his face, and that accounted for the moisture on his face. He then came back and asked for a life sentence with nine months of solitary confinement.

Mignini knew he was framing an innocent woman. He did it to deflect attention away from his own imploding career. He needed the positive sensational coverage, the professional 'win', and the confirmation of satanic sex orgies or as close as he could get because having made those claims was the reason why his career was imploding.

Mignini cried. He knew what he was doing.

He's a vile lying corrupt bastard, not an inhuman monster with no feelings.

 

[Kaosium]

In case anyone else hasn't yet got the message:

The fact that section 5 have the case does mean a 'united sections' hearing has been denied.


I hope that's clear now. Sorry to be annoyingly "superior" etc, but that's what comes from possession of the facts. Sorry to bring bad news for you, but you know, don't shoot the messenger.

Could you post a source backing your contention?

 

[AmyStrange]

-

In case anyone else hasn't yet got the message:

The fact that section 5 have the case does mean a 'united sections' hearing has been denied.


I hope that's clear now. Sorry to be annoyingly "superior" etc, but that's what comes from possession of the facts. Sorry to bring bad news for you, but you know, don't shoot the messenger.

-

No one said anything about you being annoying. Personally, I thinks it's hilarious that you think your superior, because you know ONE fact.

Come on back and let us see how many other FACTS you got,

d

-

 

[AmyStrange]

"Grinder correct"

-

In Candace Dempsey's book, she related that after Amanda spoke in her own defense at the end of her first trial, maresca left the room before she spoke, and Mignini left the room afterwards. Amanda's eleven year old sister happened to be outside the courthouse door as Mignini came out, and she said he was crying. Mignini later claimed he was sweating and only went into the bathroom to splash some water on his face, and that accounted for the moisture on his face. He then came back and asked for a life sentence with nine months of solitary confinement.

Mignini knew he was framing an innocent woman. He did it to deflect attention away from his own imploding career. He needed the positive sensational coverage, the professional 'win', and the confirmation of satanic sex orgies or as close as he could get because having made those claims was the reason why his career was imploding.

Mignini cried. He knew what he was doing.

He's a vile lying corrupt bastard, not an inhuman monster with no feelings.

-

You make a good arguement that Mignini knew they were innocent. I guess it's possible that the word "frame" some folks use here might be "Grinder correct" after all,

d

-

 

[Desert Fox]

I heard ion the latest SGU podcast that two of the skepchicks are in forensic fields. Just about everybody involved if forensic fields seems to think the evidence is garbage when they look at it.

Maybe we should see about recruiting them? Main issue I am thinking about is a potential extradition battle.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Could you post a source backing your contention?

-

Thank you Kaosium. A source would be nice califrag...

d

-

 

[Grinder]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/frame

a : to devise falsely (as a criminal charge)b : to contrive the evidence against (an innocent person) so that a verdict of guilty is assured

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/frame

INFORMAL Produce false evidence against (an innocent person) so that they appear guilty:
he claims he was framed
Now what would that mean

Googles "he was framed" - 348,000 results

framed innocent -10,300,000 results

"framed by the police" innocent - 8,830,000

The lead definition in the cite you provided appears to accommodate all of the interpretations people have used on these boards. I don't see any controversy.
The real issue is what happened. Did the police/Mignini/Napoleone/Ficcara/Finzi and all the rest; did they fudge the line? Did they do anything crooked or shady?

Did they frame two college students? Did they know the two students were innocent or were likely innocent while they were doing it?

Do the Italian police see anything wrong with this type of case building - first pick a suspect(s), then find evidence to support your claims, and suppress or destroy any conflicting evidence.

Dear gawd - the first definition says devise falsely a criminal charge which isn't false if the person is guilty.

They didn't frame them, certainly at first. There is nothing to prove Rudi was an informant. If there was proof of it, the defense would be screaming to high heaven.

I would say that evidence often follows suspicion. LE gets a search warrant when they have probable cause not definitive evidence. That's how it works.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

In Candace Dempsey's book, she related that after Amanda spoke in her own defense at the end of her first trial, maresca left the room before she spoke, and Mignini left the room afterwards. Amanda's eleven year old sister happened to be outside the courthouse door as Mignini came out, and she said he was crying. Mignini later claimed he was sweating and only went into the bathroom to splash some water on his face, and that accounted for the moisture on his face. He then came back and asked for a life sentence with nine months of solitary confinement.

Mignini knew he was framing an innocent woman. He did it to deflect attention away from his own imploding career. He needed the positive sensational coverage, the professional 'win', and the confirmation of satanic sex orgies or as close as he could get because having made those claims was the reason why his career was imploding.

Mignini cried. He knew what he was doing.

He's a vile lying corrupt bastard, not an inhuman monster with no feelings.

Can you provide any citation that supports your assertion that Mignini (Beelzebub ) career has imploded since the 1st level trial, not that it has the slightest relevance to the case as it stands now.

Thanks in advance.

ETA: I believe Dr Mignini is effectively the deputy Prosecutor General of the Region of Umbria, Dr Galati (remember him?) is the Prosecutor General of the Region of Umbria.