Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[AmyStrange]

-

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.

-

Sorry g, but that's how you interpret it. I interpret it as saying, the (devised) false evidence is why the charge is false. You can't charge someone here in the US unless you have evidence, and if you falsify evidence, then the result is a false charge, but like I always say, that's just my opinion,

d

-

 

[carbonjam72]

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.

It is interesting what causes you to poke up and comment.

I'm not sure why you want to attribute your misinterpretations to me, to wit; "your assertion that Mignini (Beelzebub ) career has imploded since the 1st level trial"

I'd say the fact that Mignini and Guitarri were convicted and sentenced to 14 and 16 months in prison respectively, would be considered an imploding career in most countries.

The fact that the conviction were set aside on a technicality of jurisdiction hardly addresses the issues upon which the charges were based and found to have merit.

The thing to keep your eye on, is whether Mignini will advance any further. (If Mignini does advance further, then you're right, and I'm wrong.) I would argue granting Mignini a promotion, was the simplest cleanest way to insure he would be never initiate another witch hunt or embarrass himself, the judiciary, or Italy with any more of his satanic cult sexual orgy obsessions. He is now limited to only hearing appeals (presumably not alone), and posing with school children. In the US, we call that "failing up".

But true justice for Meredith Kercher will only be had when Giuliano Mignini claims his jail cell, and Amanda and Raffaele are fully exonerated and honored for their extraordinary dignity in the face of unjust adversity. It's a shame you can't see that.

 

[Grinder]

Sorry g, but that's how you interpret it. I interpret it as saying, the (devised) false evidence is why the charge is false. You can't charge someone here in the US unless you have evidence, and if you falsify evidence, then the result is a false charge, but like I always say, that's just my opinion,

There is no way to interpret it to mean that they used false evidence to make a false charge on a guilty person of the charge. The charge would be correct the evidence tainted and the person guilty of doing the crime.

Before arguing more produce from a standard dictionary that says framing can be of a guilty person. Find one that says a guilty or innocent person can be framed of a crime.

 

[Bill Williams]

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.

There is variance of opinion here. At least one lawyer in Italy and a couple of other commentators are saying different.

The first item of business for Section 5 is the issue of bumping to a United Sections hearing. If they deny it then they set a date for a Section 5 hearing.

My sources are divided, though, as to whether or not the two appeals are to be heard, "in unity."

Like a lot of things, all this will soon be known anyway.

 

[Grinder]

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.

From the earliest days of this case and the FOA a main theme has been about nutty Mignini, Preston's treatment and the charges against M.

He has avoided all punishment to date and received a promotion. I think he is nutty but he certainly hasn't had an implosion.

I can't imagine that he or anybody would think this case was a good way to restore his career. He would have achieved much more by backing off the kids and convicting Rudi.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

It is interesting what causes you to poke up and comment.

I'm not sure why you want to attribute your misinterpretations to me, to wit; "your assertion that Mignini (Beelzebub ) career has imploded since the 1st level trial"

I'd say the fact that Mignini and Guitarri were convicted and sentenced to 14 and 16 months in prison respectively, would be considered an imploding career in most countries.

The fact that the conviction were set aside on a technicality of jurisdiction hardly addresses the issues upon which the charges were based and found to have merit.

The thing to keep your eye on, is whether Mignini will advance any further. (If Mignini does advance further, then you're right, and I'm wrong.) I would argue granting Mignini a promotion, was the simplest cleanest way to insure he would be never initiate another witch hunt or embarrass himself, the judiciary, or Italy with any more of his satanic cult sexual orgy obsessions. He is now limited to only hearing appeals (presumably not alone), and posing with school children. In the US, we call that "failing up".

But true justice for Meredith Kercher will only be had when Giuliano Mignini claims his jail cell, and Amanda and Raffaele are fully exonerated and honored for their extraordinary dignity in the face of unjust adversity. It's a shame you can't see that.

Oke doke, I understand you are unable to provide any citation to support your assertion, then proceed to mumble, mumble, waffle and blather on etc etc. It is not me you should be concerned with but whomever promoted Mignini.

 

[xinonix]

Do we know for sure that Mignini expected the jury to find AK +RS guilty?
In order to get a shorter sentence for Rudy, they had to make believe he was one of 3 people who did the crime together. Then he makes a deal to rat out the other 2 suspects to get a reduction in sentence. Mignini did not need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that AK + RS did it, he only needs to use them as suspects. After Rudy got his reduction in sentence, it was no longer neccessary to prove anything.

 

[Samson]

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.

Who could forget Dr Galati? This individual was responsible for taking a factual account of the events and twisting it into knots like a five year old explaining the empty cookie jar.
What do you remember about Dr Galati? That he represented a step forward for your local economy?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

From the earliest days of this case and the FOA a main theme has been about nutty Mignini, Preston's treatment and the charges against M.

He has avoided all punishment to date and received a promotion. I think he is nutty but he certainly hasn't had an implosion.

I can't imagine that he or anybody would think this case was a good way to restore his career. He would have achieved much more by backing off the kids and convicting Rudi.

I do not get the impression that this case has affected Mignini’s career; do you?
Guede is in prison; convicted, not long enough for my taste but there you are.

 

[Samson]

Do we know for sure that Mignini expected the jury to find AK +RS guilty?
In order to get a shorter sentence for Rudy, they had to make believe he was one of 3 people who did the crime together. Then he makes a deal to rat out the other 2 suspects to get a reduction in sentence. Mignini did not need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that AK + RS did it, he only needs to use them as suspects. After Rudy got his reduction in sentence, it was no longer neccessary to prove anything.

To answer this question we would need to know more about Mignini's relationship with Massei, and whether lay jurors do any more than sit there like flower girls at a wedding.

 

[Desert Fox]

To answer this question we would need to know more about Mignini's relationship with Massei, and whether lay jurors do any more than sit there like flower girls at a wedding.

Kind of like asking about the previous court decisions of Judge Nencini.
Nobody seems to be able to find out if most are as crazy as this one.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

]Who could forget Dr Galati? This individual was responsible for taking a factual account of the events and twisting it into knots like a five year old explaining the empty cookie jar.

What do you remember about Dr Galati? That he represented a step forward for your local economy?

Local economy, what are you on about (a rhetorical question)?

Dr Galati was the author of the prosecution appeal against the Perugian appeal verdict, as I recall he or the prosecution won their appeal, which led to the Florence appeal, but you knew this; right?

 

[Grinder]

I do not get the impression that this case has affected Mignini’s career; do you?
Guede is in prison; convicted, not long enough for my taste but there you are.

It does not seem that the career of Mignini has been derailed. He received a promotion.

For some reason many here now are more into crazzzzy theories about framing and intrigues involving Rudi.

You request for sources and cites will be greeted with the same enthusiasm as finding an actual definition of the word frame.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

There is no way to interpret it to mean that they used false evidence to make a false charge on a guilty person of the charge. The charge would be correct the evidence tainted and the person guilty of doing the crime.

Before arguing more produce from a standard dictionary that says framing can be of a guilty person. Find one that says a guilty or innocent person can be framed of a crime.

-

Most definitions I see are "informal" definitions, which I interpret as meaning it's a form of slang, but I'm sure you see it differently.

Here's one that doesn't use the term "innocent", but "seem" instead:

FROM: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/american-english/frame

"infml to make a person seem to be guilty of a crime by providing false information: 'It looked like somebody was trying to frame him.'"

Of course I'm sure you'll argue that "seem" means innocent, but (as always it comes back to that) unless you can prove absolutely that someone is guilty, they could be innocent.

I disagree with your "informal" definition that only the innocent can be framed, and will stick with the definition I use in my sig.

I don't disagree with you that Mignini didn't frame anyone because the probabilities are that he did think they were guilty, but the destroyed evidence makes me wonder if that maybe he did think they were innocent, and that's why the evidence was destroyed (which is kind of a framing, in my opinion), but I can't prove it. It's just a suspicion I have,

d

-

 

[Samson]

Local economy, what are you on about (a rhetorical question)?

Dr Galati was the author of the prosecution appeal against the Perugian appeal verdict, as I recall he or the prosecution won their appeal, which led to the Florence appeal, but you knew this; right?

Yes, and I read it, as all the prosecution and motivation reports. I regard them as sufficient material to form a cast iron view of the straightforward events of the case. The worst experience was reading Massei on the break in, it became immediately apparent he was wrong about the direction of the rock, Hellman was right, Galati was wrong again as were Crini and Nencini.

 

[AmyStrange]

It really depends on what Mignini wanted to do with his life...

-

It does not seem that the career of Mignini has been derailed. He received a promotion.

For some reason many here now are more into crazzzzy theories about framing and intrigues involving Rudi.

You request for sources and cites will be greeted with the same enthusiasm as finding an actual definition of the word frame.

-

If where Mignin is now (reviewing cases or whatever it is he now does), is where he wants to be, then I agree that his career has not been derailed, but if he'd rather be out there being in charge of criminal cases rather than just reviewing them (or whatever he is now doing), then yes his career has been derailed.

I'd like to see if he ever is allowed to take charge of a case again. That would be interesting to see what happens then.

But as always, that's just my opinion,

d

-

 

[Chris_Halkides]

failing upward

Oke doke, I understand you are unable to provide any citation to support your assertion, then proceed to mumble, mumble, waffle and blather on etc etc. It is not me you should be concerned with but whomever promoted Mignini.

CoulsdonUK,

Mignini's conviction at the trial of first instance is evidence. Whomever promoted Mignini had reasons about which one may speculate. People sometimes rise to the level of their incompetence, as Lawrence Peter observed, but Mignini may have been an exception.

 

[Samson]

I do not get the impression that this case has affected Mignini’s career; do you?
Guede is in prison; convicted, not long enough for my taste but there you are.

Google translate of latest

PERUGIA
Rudy wants to go free, called the "super discount" of penaAlessandro Antonini
21 / Sept / 2014 - 09:32

Rudy wants early release. It demands a super cut of the sentence. The only one to be behind bars for the death of Meredith Kercher intends to quit before the age of 16 and is doing everything possible to get the discounts provided by the new rules-empty prisons. No to the supervising judge in an additional "discount" from cell Mammagialla of Viterbo takes pen and paper to instruct his lawyers to file complaints and demanding. Result: the surveillance court of Rome fixed the hearing in closed session for October 10.

Full article

http://corrieredellumbria.corr.it/news/perugia/150433/Rudy-vuole-tornare-libero--chiesto.html

 

[Grinder]

Most definitions I see are "informal" definitions, which I interpret as meaning it's a form of slang, but I'm sure you see it differently.

Here's one that doesn't use the term "innocent", but "seem" instead:

FROM: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/american-english/frame

"infml to make a person seem to be guilty of a crime by providing false information: 'It looked like somebody was trying to frame him.'"

It is an informal word but so what? It still has A definition. You really think that the example would be taken by anybody except 5 people on JREF and a blogger named Skeptical Juror would take that to mean maybe he was guilty and the police were being loose with the evidence.

It clearly means he was innocent and being framed.

Now your dictionary produces this:

frame-up
noun [C] UK /ˈfreɪm.ʌp/ informal US
› a situation in which someone is made to seem guilty of a crime although they have not committed it:The organization protested that it was the victim of a politically motivated frame-up.

Of course I'm sure you'll argue that "seem" means innocent, but (as always it comes back to that) unless you can prove absolutely that someone is guilty, they could be innocent.

And the other option is that "make a person seem to be guilty" is that he is guilty and the frame made him seem guilty...really?

I don't disagree with you that Mignini didn't frame anyone because the probabilities are that he did think they were guilty, but the destroyed evidence makes me wonder if that maybe he did think they were innocent, and that's why the evidence was destroyed (which is kind of a framing, in my opinion), but I can't prove it. It's just a suspicion I have,

But what difference does it make whether he thought them innocent or guilty, it's framing either way by your definition.



-[/QUOTE]

 

[Chris_Halkides]

slinging slang

Amy Strange,

An hard copy dictionary I have (Webster's New World Dictionary, Collegiate edition, 1955): "7. [Slang] to falsify evidence, testimony, etc. beforehand to in order to make (a person) appear guilty." I provided a slightly different definition from Harper Collins as well.

A physics professor of mine said that definitions are not right or wrong, they are useful or useless. If we restrict frame to situations in which the framer knows of the innoncence of the framee, then we need additional terms for other cases and perhaps an umbrella term. I have enormous respect for The Skeptical Juror, but I have no strong opinion on the guilt or innocence of Preston Hughes, not having studied the case closely enough.