Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Diocletus]

He seems to be being very arch (does that compute in American?).

Hm. I don't know. Is it like douchey?

 

[Kauffer]

Yes, on the 6th and the 5th. But she did not have those rights in Italy; she had rights granted by the Italian Constitution and the ECHR (Convention and case-law). It is those rights which so far have been egregiously violated.

A question for extradition, then, is whether someone should be extradited if the requesting country's process was a violation of fundamental rights in that country.

Another question for extradition is whether someone whose actual innocence can be strongly argued may be extradited, since the US may only arrest a person on "probable cause."

You make important points. But if Cassation confirms guilt it will be a new application to the ECHR. I do not believe Italy would request extradition but it is so unsatisfactory to leave things there as Ms Knox could be effectively travel banned in Europe with a live European Arrest Warrant. And for her sake these convictions should not be allowed to stand anyway. So, Cassation either sends this back to appellate level, snuffs out the convictions (except calumny) or this case may wait some considerable time for ECHR rulings or perhaps a possible revival in Italy with an appeal by the defence based on new evidence. But, if the ECHR agrees to hear the calumny application, I hardly see Cassation confirming Nencini. I think it will be the beginning of the end; Ms Knox and indeed Mr Sollecito will effectively have won at this point. The ECHR can only find in her favour given, as you have referred to, the Italian constitution, European convention and case law.

 

[lonepinealex]

Hm. I don't know. Is it like douchey?

It's more like mild, slightly camp sarcasm.

 

[js202]

IQ deficiency intersected with careerism

How can Ms. Barbie Nadeau hold one of the first outside photographs demonstrating police corruption in this case and never even mention it. It's like she only reports what the prosecution wants her to report.

Sorry, just saw this. Good question. I think the simplest explanation is certain denial of access if she had elicited and analyzed anything running contrary to the prosecution's version of events. Plus, she is clearly not very bright.

It's been a long time since anything like the kind of journalistic bravery Woodward and Bernstein - with the heroic support of Ben Bradlee - practiced held sway. Nadeau saw her job as keeping her paymaster Tina Brown - who embraced similar obligations to her own corporate paymasters - happy and the freelance paychecks coming. The sacred obligations of the Fourth Estate have been reduced to hacks like Nadeau doing what they do for whatever money and notoriety they can achieve. Serious journalism and tabloid journalism have been conjoined.

 

[Numbers]

You make important points. But if Cassation confirms guilt it will be a new application to the ECHR. I do not believe Italy would request extradition but it is so unsatisfactory to leave things there as Ms Knox could be effectively travel banned in Europe with a live European Arrest Warrant. And for her sake these convictions should not be allowed to stand anyway. So, Cassation either sends this back to appellate level, snuffs out the convictions (except calumny) or this case may wait some considerable time for ECHR rulings or perhaps a possible revival in Italy with an appeal by the defence based on new evidence. But, if the ECHR agrees to hear the calumny application, I hardly see Cassation confirming Nencini. I think it will be the beginning of the end; Ms Knox and indeed Mr Sollecito will effectively have won at this point. The ECHR can only find in her favour given, as you have referred to, the Italian constitution, European convention and case law.

The issue may be one of timing; will the ECHR reach a decision of admissibility and then of judgment before the March, 2015 CSC review?

And at least here in the US, we have no idea of the political complexion of the CSC section 5 panel ("party of the prosecutors" v. impartial judges). They may acquit or quash Nencini (leading to revival of Hellmann, we're told) or they may convict.

 

[Kauffer]

The issue may be one of timing; will the ECHR reach a decision of admissibility and then of judgment before the March, 2015 CSC review?

And at least here in the US, we have no idea of the political complexion of the CSC section 5 panel ("party of the prosecutors" v. impartial judges). They may acquit or quash Nencini (leading to revival of Hellmann, we're told) or they may convict.

I think it is purely the admissibility question. It's not necessary for a judgement to arrive before March. That will be enough. I seem to recall Ms Knox saying she expected the decision (on admissibility) in November - I might be wrong on that.

 

[Kaosium]

The reported lower limits of detection for HemaTrace are considerably better than 1 part in 1,000,000. The chances of obtaining a false negative are not high IMO.

"Positive results were obtained with the HemaTrace test
up to a dilution of 1: 16,777,216."

I also see it got a positive reaction from a ten year-old blood stain that was kept at room temperature.

 

[Numbers]

I think it is purely the admissibility question. It's not necessary for a judgement to arrive before March. That will be enough. I seem to recall Ms Knox saying she expected the decision (on admissibility) in November - I might be wrong on that.

I believe that ECtHR tries to get admissibility findings or decisions (especially striking out) within one year. I may have missed an AK statement on the timeline. If ECtHR does find the application admissible, there may be little additional information if there is an attempt at "friendly settlement" or requests by ECtHR for more information.

The CSC could finesse the ECtHR issue by quashing Nencini and ordering a new 2nd level trial.

 

[Desert Fox]

Dershowitz was trying to sell a book and this was topic of the moment. He hadn't done his homework and made some embarrassing remarks.

Interesting what you say about 5th amendment rights; it is a complex question in this case. For me, it's Ms Knox's 6th amendment rights that have been so egregiously trampled. You could almost have written the 6th amendment as a response to her treatment. It fits so well.

Being that I am pretty sure that Dershowitz defended O.J., I would argue that his virtue is for sale. If money changed hands from Amanda to him, suddenly he would argue for her innocence.

 

[Dan O.]

"Positive results were obtained with the HemaTrace test
up to a dilution of 1: 16,777,216."

I also see it got a positive reaction from a ten year-old blood stain that was kept at room temperature.

BTW, how is the dilution of a dried blood stain measured?

 

[Kaosium]

BTW, how is the dilution of a dried blood stain measured?

There's no indication the 10 year-old dried blood stain I referred to was diluted.

 

[Diocletus]

I think it is purely the admissibility question. It's not necessary for a judgement to arrive before March. That will be enough. I seem to recall Ms Knox saying she expected the decision (on admissibility) in November - I might be wrong on that.

I view the apparent passage of time since filing as a good sign. If the case is admitted ISC is going to have a big problem on its hands.

 

[Numbers]

BTW, how is the dilution of a dried blood stain measured?

Would a damp swab be required to transport some of the material of the stain to the test equipment (HemaTrace card)? If so, the sample may be relatively concentrated.

 

[Numbers]

I view the apparent passage of time since filing as a good sign. If the case is admitted ISC is going to have a big problem on its hands.

Yes, but how will the complex Italian judicial system deal with the problem?

On the murder/rape case, CSC could simply acquit, or they could strike out all of AK's statements and writings from the beginning of her interrogation until she had a lawyer, and order a retrial with the remaining evidence of record.

The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe would, I believe, work to get her conviction for calunnia annulled, if the ECtHR found her rights violated during the interrogation that produced the statement (no lawyer, no fair translator, coercion, incitement). But even an ECtHR judgment in her favor would not automatically overthrow the calunnia conviction, since ECtHR is not an appeal court.

 

[Numbers]

RW wrote:

hat's a pubic hair in her grasp.
Italian Forensic Police collected it, and have lost both samples.
They will also not release any results of a probable semen test found next to the victim.

In a sex crime turned into a horrible murder,
I'll ask you, can you prove me wrong?
That is a pubic hair...
RW

Your theory may be correct.
The problem is the evidence is with the Italian police or lost.

ETA The photo may be good evidence that the Italian police did not conduct an effective investigation - for consideration by ECtHR or some other organization.

 

[Bill Williams]

Let's not go down the path of personal attacks against posters that refuse to engage in honest debate. That path will surely lead to sanctions. I have an extensive list of posters I consider nothing but trolls that will never contribute meaningfully to this thread. The forum even has a facility to help manage such lists here.

I agree with this. In fact, that is the whole purpose of the trollish comment, to move discussion from the issues at hand, to a flame war that gets everyone banned.

And I am the worst. There may be room for one comment, which reminds the poster that they've never once addressed an issue of substance,but then leave it at that.

MOO.

 

[Bill Williams]

"The truth is it's a very close case. There's a lot of evidence of guilt, there's some evidence of innocence. On balance, it's more likely than not that she did, but there's not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/alan-dershowitz-amanda-knox-murder-trial/2014/01/31/id/550244/

Thanks. This is not the one I saw, but consistent with what I saw. I had only inferred the quote above from Dershowitz from what I'd seen.

Dershowitz is perhaps the only bona fide "expert" that the Pro-guilt lobby can point to for support, outside of PLE or the internecine war within Italians legal system. And man oh man, is THAT support?

Here's my view of something.......

...... whenever someone says, "There's something Amanda Knox knows that she's not telling us...."

...... I'm beginning to think that that statement is shorthand for, "I've not yet made enough money from this tragedy."

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Morehead-Cain Scholar

That is after all the university where one of the premier experts in New Testament studies teaches.

Mr. Stafford-Smith was also a Morehead-Cain scholar at UNC-Chapel Hill, according to wikipedia.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Nencini's odd priorities

Is he saying that it's the defense consultants' fault that Stefanoni destroyed the clasp because the defense consultants failed to object to her destruction of the clasp? LOL.

Anglolawyer and Diocletus,

I did not understand that passage, but I would point out that Nencini goes to great pains to defend Stefanoni against the charge that her interpretation was suspect-centered, which is both odd and informative. For Stefanoni not to receive criticism for her handling of the clasp, while Conti and Vecchiotti are criticized on dubious grounds is remarkable.

 

[Kauffer]

Legal process

snip

The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe would, I believe, work to get her conviction for calunnia annulled, if the ECtHR found her rights violated during the interrogation that produced the statement (no lawyer, no fair translator, coercion, incitement). But even an ECtHR judgment in her favor would not automatically overthrow the calunnia conviction, since ECtHR is not an appeal court.

Really? What is the process in Italian law for having a conviction annulled in these circumstances? Is there one? You are right that an ECHR judgement does not overthrow a conviction. However I am not aware of a duty imposed on Council of Europe ministers to work for anullments.

Here is a nightmare scenario: Cassation uphold convictions. Mr Sollecito is immediately arrested and imprisoned. His defence file an Article 6 application with the ECHR. Some time later, it is upheld. Mr Sollecito wins. What happens next under Italian law?