Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Diocletus]

It's something I've always known. The issue simply hasn't come up so has never been posted in these threads.

01:22, 1 February 2010 Dan O. (Talk | contribs | block) (2,805 bytes) (Created page with 'Those keys for a staging Category:News (Kercher) Republic - November 14, 2007 Page 17 Section: CHRONICLE [http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2007/11…')​

And yet, no one has ever seen even one cat.

 

[anglolawyer]

It's something I've always known. The issue simply hasn't come up so has never been posted in these threads.

01:22, 1 February 2010 Dan O. (Talk | contribs | block) (2,805 bytes) (Created page with 'Those keys for a staging Category:News (Kercher) Republic - November 14, 2007 Page 17 Section: CHRONICLE [http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2007/11…')​

Sorry Dan but what is Italian for 'two cats'

 

[anglolawyer]

And yet, no one has ever seen even one cat.

That's because there can only be either two or none, as in quantum theory or something.

 

[Diocletus]

You seem to be slipping Mach.

Mach's ECHR arguments are so weak, that I am now convinced that this ECHR thing is virtually unknown in Italy. My belief in this regard is placed in doubt only by the shear number of ECHR filings that emanate from Italy, suggesting that someone must have heard of this thing.

 

[Diocletus]

Happily, there is no conceivable way the judges could be unfairly influenced by any of this and I am sure this will be Italy's main argument in the ECHR.

The Grand Chamber just said no to this:
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-147329

 

[anglolawyer]

You have to follow along. This is a multipart conspiracy.

Part 1 was that they actually thought on Nov. 2 that one of the guys downstairs was a perp.

Part 2 was that they discovered on Nov. 3 that all of the guys downstairs had good alibis.

Part 3 was that they needed to make the downstairs crime scene go away so no one (in particular Matteini) would get the idea that there was a real burglar around as opposed to a resident stager/cleaner-upper. Thus:





Having succeeded in throwing Matteini off the scent, now it was time to make use of the "discovery," during the Mobile Squad's unsupervised pillaging of the flat on Nov. 6, of the keys to the downstairs apartment right there in Amanda's room (well, really the hallway, where the cops had probably placed them).

Part 4 was to revive the cat's blood, that hadn't been mentioned to Matteini--see Perugia Shock entry dated Monday, November 12, 2007 (can't find it right now).

Part 5 was to link together Amanda, the keys, and the downstairs blood:

All very interesting. Here's a question for you, or maybe Dan knows. Was the hand with the finger cuts the same as the hand that made the pillow print? If so, your theory has a problem because there are no blotches associated with the supposedly heavily-bleeding hand.

 

[anglolawyer]

The Grand Chamber just said no to this:
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-147329

I thought this bit was interesting:

When applying the above criteria [concerning whether police conduct constituted entrapment] , the Court places the burden of proof on the authorities. It falls to the prosecution to prove that there was no incitement, provided that the defendant’s allegations are not wholly improbable. In practice, the authorities may be prevented from discharging this burden by the absence of formal authorisation and supervision of the undercover operation (see Bannikova, cited above, § 48). The Court has emphasised in that context the need for a clear and foreseeable procedure for authorising investigative measures, as well as for their proper supervision. It considered judicial supervision as the most appropriate means in case of covert operations (see Bannikova, cited above, §§ 49-50; compare also Edwards and Lewis, cited above, §§ 46 and 48).

Insert 'tape recording' in place of 'supervision' in the bolded text. How will the cops discharge this burden? Apart from lying, obviously.

 

[Diocletus]

I thought this bit was interesting:


Insert 'tape recording' in place of 'supervision' in the bolded text. How will the cops discharge this burden? Apart from lying, obviously.

They did have supervision. Giobbi was in the control room listening to her scream.

 

[Numbers]

And yet, no one has ever seen even one cat.

In Italy, clever cats avoid corrupt cops.

 

[Numbers]

I thought this bit was interesting:


Insert 'tape recording' in place of 'supervision' in the bolded text. How will the cops discharge this burden? Apart from lying, obviously.

Quotes from the case of FURCHT v. GERMANY (Application no. 54648/09):

The Court reiterates that the admissibility of evidence is primarily a matter for regulation by national law and, as a rule, it is for the national courts to assess the evidence before them. The Court, for its part, must ascertain whether the proceedings as a whole, including the way in which evidence was taken, were fair
When faced with a plea of police incitement, or entrapment, the Court will attempt to establish whether there has been such incitement or entrapment (substantive test of incitement; see Bannikova, cited above, § 37). Police incitement occurs where the officers involved do not confine themselves to investigating criminal activity in an essentially passive manner, but exert such an influence on the subject as to incite the commission of an offence that would otherwise not have been committed, in order to make it possible to establish the offence, that is, to provide evidence and institute a prosecution _____
ETA: Police and prosecutors in Italy may not yet have heard about the ECHR. Italy was a founding member of the Council of Europe and founding signatory to the Convention, but news travels slowly in some parts of the world.

 

[Dan O.]

Sorry Dan but what is Italian for 'two cats'

The original page is no longer accessible without a subscription. But reversing the Google translation of the statement yields:

On that ground, with three other boys, lives Giacomo Silenzi, Meredith's boyfriend, on 3 November he had told police: "Before leaving for Porto San Giorgio I gave the keys to my house asking Meredith to disinfect one of my two cats that had injured her ear.​

Per tale motivo, con altri tre ragazzi, vive Giacomo Silenzi, il fidanzato di Meredith, il 3 novembre aveva detto alla polizia: "Prima di partire per Porto San Giorgio ho dato le chiavi di casa mia chiedendo Meredith per disinfettare uno dei miei due gatti che erano feriti suo orecchio.​

And indeed, I can then use that phrase to search for other references to the two cats in the original italian sources:
http://www.tgcom24.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/articolo388536.shtml
http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/amanda-l-unica-non-piangere-mez.html
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-conten...Pasquali-Farsi-Argiro-Campolongo-Luciani1.pdf

ETA: Translation from that last link:

DEPOSIZIONE DEL TESTE - LUCIANI RICCARDO
...
LAWYER Ghirga - Look, with regard to your apartment you will know if not I ask were found traces of blood in relation to the cats, wants to tell us how many cats were keeping you?
HEADS - Two, two cats.
LAWYER Ghirga - Remember one was black and one was striped for example?
WITNESS - Yes, yes.
LAWYER Ghirga - There was one casualty of these cats?
HEADS - yes I know but I do not remember if I was injured when I was in Perugia, I know, however, was injured by another cat.
LAWYER Ghirga - I ask better, one of these cats was wounded in the ear.
WITNESS - Yes.
LAWYER Ghirga - It has left traces of blood, she remembers what was this cat? Then this makes sense ...
WITNESS - He was the black cat.
LAWYER Ghirga - The black cat. Remember ... in his memory that remembers her, this wound was so loud, it was so ...
HEADS - I did not see the wound.​

 

[Numbers]

All very interesting. Here's a question for you, or maybe Dan knows. Was the hand with the finger cuts the same as the hand that made the pillow print? If so, your theory has a problem because there are no blotches associated with the supposedly heavily-bleeding hand.

News bulletin (to be published in the Onion, perhaps):

It wasn't cat blood after all. The DB (downstairs boys) all had had bad nose bleeds prior to leaving for Marche on holiday. That's why there was blood on the pillow. The blood on the briefs ---- don't ask.

 

[Diocletus]

The original page is no longer accessible without a subscription. But reversing the Google translation of the statement yields:

On that ground, with three other boys, lives Giacomo Silenzi, Meredith's boyfriend, on 3 November he had told police: "Before leaving for Porto San Giorgio I gave the keys to my house asking Meredith to disinfect one of my two cats that had injured her ear.​

Per tale motivo, con altri tre ragazzi, vive Giacomo Silenzi, il fidanzato di Meredith, il 3 novembre aveva detto alla polizia: "Prima di partire per Porto San Giorgio ho dato le chiavi di casa mia chiedendo Meredith per disinfettare uno dei miei due gatti che erano feriti suo orecchio.​

And indeed, I can then use that phrase to search for other references to the two cats in the original italian sources:
http://www.tgcom24.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/articolo388536.shtml
http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/amanda-l-unica-non-piangere-mez.html
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-conten...Pasquali-Farsi-Argiro-Campolongo-Luciani1.pdf

Here's a little more:

Repubblica, Nov. 5
Two traces of blood, which are identical to those found in the apartment of Meredith, were found in the home of neighbors, downstairs in the farmhouse via Sant'Antonio, rented to four students Marche, one of whom had a flirtation with the English girl. He has an alibi, it was home to the bridge, and it seems the other three. But they are the ones that the police held under pressure. If you were not there and since the door was not forced, to some of the guys who lent the keys?

No mention of the cat here.

 

[Desert Fox]

In Italy, clever cats avoid corrupt cops.

If only Amanda had listened to the cats

 

[Planigale]

The second point risen by Kaosium:



Now, first a tiny collateral point: Massei does not write "in contradiction with" ("in contraddizione con") as for my memory he writes "in contrast with" ("in contrasto con"). Maybe the translator or the defence enhanced a bit the "contrast"; the word contraddizione is a bit stronger than contrasto in my opinion, we may even prefer to talk about how the translator put it instead of how Massei put it. This point of wording was only a side note.

She certainly "laid only luminol there", if you put it literally like that, since TMB is not "laid" on the trace, it is an indirect test.

Now, there is the RTIGF where the TMB test is not indicated, but the argument that Stefanoni lied about the TMB test is an accusation that hinges entirely on the assertion that she explicitly denied having performed further tests on those samples.

But, what did she actually say?
Is it true, what you attribute to Sarah Gino reporting her words? Or is it just a hearsay from Sarah Gino? Or maybe even just your own interpretation of Sarah Gino?

Let's see what Stefanoni said, her actual words in the courtroom since her first hearing, Oct. 4. 2008, when she talked about the luminol tests for the first time:



Patrizia Stefanoni says: we have also done a series of tests in our laboratory about the possible blood nature on those luminol samples, then immediately makes a digression to explain: further tests done on luminol traces in order to establish if it's blood are at high-risk of yielding false negatives, since the traces are latent and usually at a too low concentration.

But she says: we have done "a series of tests" on these luminol traces. The prosecutor seems focused on the luminol traces picked from the floor in Filomena's room, but Stefanoni doesn't seem to be making clear distinctions.

She implies immediately after that these "tests", normally, should not be done, because they are at too high risk of yielding false negative results; yet, she says on this specific occasion they did further tests of multiple kind about the blood nature of the luminol traces.

If you read further on, at p. 112, while talking about a possible TMB test on the knife, she mentions again the luminol example and picks again the same concept: as a normal praxis, it's better to not do further tests on latent traces found with luminol, because they are at high risk of being negative, and the sample gets wasted. (we did it; but we shouldn't do it normally).

So the truth is, from her very first hearing as a witness, Stefanoni said she performed further tests (apparently multiple types of further blood tests) on the luminol traces.

Mach,

What I think you fail to realise is your own arguments defeat you. Because we come from different philosophies.

Stefanoni argues that doing a further test might result in a false negative, but is satisfied to accept a false positive. By doing a further test you gain further information, you do not lose knowledge of the Luminol test. Stefanoni and by implication the Italian prosecutorial system prefer lack of information because it gives freedom to formulate theories. Given the result of the Luminol test one can say there is a Luminol positive stain this might be blood. Given a TMB negative result, one can say this might be blood but most likely is not. Knowledge is gained not lost.

PS were the defence experts present for the series of further tests carried out?

 

[Supercalifragilistic]

No, surely not?

Even assuming that all the procedures were followed correctly on a technical basis, does it really matter if innocent people are convicted of crimes that they did not commit. I believe in the spirit of the law. The spirit is that guilty people are convicted and innocent people are not.

Really? You could knock me down with a feather, Socrates. There's me thinking that we should be more concerned with jailing the innocent. You always get brilliant, mind-opening stuff on the International Skeptics Forum.

 

[Desert Fox]

Really? You could knock me down with a feather, Socrates. There's me thinking that we should be more concerned with jailing the innocent. You always get brilliant, mind-opening stuff on the International Skeptics Forum.

As a skeptic, if you have a set of procedures to stop shenanigans but they actually aid shenanigans, that violates the spirit the rules were written to protect.

 

[Diocletus]

The original page is no longer accessible without a subscription. But reversing the Google translation of the statement yields:

On that ground, with three other boys, lives Giacomo Silenzi, Meredith's boyfriend, on 3 November he had told police: "Before leaving for Porto San Giorgio I gave the keys to my house asking Meredith to disinfect one of my two cats that had injured her ear.​

Per tale motivo, con altri tre ragazzi, vive Giacomo Silenzi, il fidanzato di Meredith, il 3 novembre aveva detto alla polizia: "Prima di partire per Porto San Giorgio ho dato le chiavi di casa mia chiedendo Meredith per disinfettare uno dei miei due gatti che erano feriti suo orecchio.​

And indeed, I can then use that phrase to search for other references to the two cats in the original italian sources:
http://www.tgcom24.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/articolo388536.shtml
http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/amanda-l-unica-non-piangere-mez.html
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-conten...Pasquali-Farsi-Argiro-Campolongo-Luciani1.pdf

ETA: Translation from that last link:

DEPOSIZIONE DEL TESTE - LUCIANI RICCARDO
...
LAWYER Ghirga - Look, with regard to your apartment you will know if not I ask were found traces of blood in relation to the cats, wants to tell us how many cats were keeping you?
HEADS - Two, two cats.
LAWYER Ghirga - Remember one was black and one was striped for example?
WITNESS - Yes, yes.
LAWYER Ghirga - There was one casualty of these cats?
HEADS - yes I know but I do not remember if I was injured when I was in Perugia, I know, however, was injured by another cat.
LAWYER Ghirga - I ask better, one of these cats was wounded in the ear.
WITNESS - Yes.
LAWYER Ghirga - It has left traces of blood, she remembers what was this cat? Then this makes sense ...
WITNESS - He was the black cat.
LAWYER Ghirga - The black cat. Remember ... in his memory that remembers her, this wound was so loud, it was so ...
HEADS - I did not see the wound.​

Yes, well, this bit of testimony is weird, too, because it's all hearsay. This guy never saw the wound--someone else told him that that cat had been injured.

 

[Diocletus]

All very interesting. Here's a question for you, or maybe Dan knows. Was the hand with the finger cuts the same as the hand that made the pillow print? If so, your theory has a problem because there are no blotches associated with the supposedly heavily-bleeding hand.

The cut hand was the right hand.

I can't recall the "pillow print."

 

[anglolawyer]

The cut hand was the right hand.

I can't recall the "pillow print."

We covered it in excruciating detail several threads ago. The conclusion was there was a print. Dan knows all about it, as with most things.