Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

Slightly off topic, but I watched Gone Girl last night - and in the film they did a luminol sweep and found what they presumed to be blood. And then immediately stated that they had confirmed this was blood and confirmed the blood type/antibodies - and were waiting on the DNA results. It made me think that even Hollywood has a better grip on forensic science

I don't think it is so much that the Italian forensics does not have a grip on the science but are trying to pull a fast one on everybody.

 

[Kauffer]

No, what? Just for clarity, I you referring to an innocent person or a person who didn't get a fair trial? It appears that the Constitution does not prohibit the execution of an actually-innocent person following a fair trial in which he has been adjudicated guilty. Doesn't seem right, but remember the Constitution predates modern times.

Yes you are right. It's quite famous. A claim of innocence is not in fact a constitutional one. Should we not argue that no trial can have been fair where an innocent person was convicted? Where new evidence emerges over time, new appeals are possible. And new evidence can represent new learning. But this is not much good if you're dead. If Willingham had survived another five years, he would be a free man today - yet another death row exoneree. Nevertheless a finding that an innocent person was executed would be far reaching in it's effects on the death penalty. Willingham was a victim of junk science. Today, whilst not entirely analagous, the misuse of LCN DNA from collection, laboratory analysis and judicial interpretation is probably as dangerous for defendants in its effects as arson science was in the early 1990s. And too many inexpert expert witnesses still prevail.

 

[Kauffer]

There has been at least one thread here on Cameron Todd Willingham, and that article was quoted a number of times.

I'm sorry. This one brings the case up to date and probably hasn't appeared here before:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/na...ts-over-a-texas-execution/?wpisrc=al_national

 

[Numbers]

Yes you are right. It's quite famous. A claim of innocence is not in fact a constitutional one. Should we not argue that no trial can have been fair where an innocent person was convicted? Where new evidence emerges over time, new appeals are possible. And new evidence can represent new learning. But this is not much good if you're dead. If Willingham had survived another five years, he would be a free man today - yet another death row exoneree. Nevertheless a finding that an innocent person was executed would be far reaching in it's effects on the death penalty. Willingham was a victim of junk science. Today, whilst not entirely analagous, the misuse of LCN DNA from collection, laboratory analysis and judicial interpretation is probably as dangerous for defendants in its effects as arson science was in the early 1990s. And too many inexpert expert witnesses still prevail.

The factors involved in wrongful convictions include but may not be limited to:
1. Official misconduct (by police and/or prosecutor; rarely the judge)
2. False or misleading forensic evidence
3. Perjury or false accusation
4. Mistaken witness identification
5. False confession
6. Inadequate legal defense

(I borrowed this list from the National Registry of Exonerations:
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/browse.aspx)

Increasing the safety of convictions would seem to require efforts to improve reliability or checks and balances in each of these six factors.

In some ways, improving forensics seems relatively easy, because there should be scientific procedures to judge reliability and technical means for improvement. LCN DNA profiling is generally not accepted in the US, AFAIK.

To combat official misconduct, approaches may include open prosecution case files to prevent violations of Brady (discovery) and perhaps an "Inspector General of Prosecutions" or conviction reliability officer covering each jurisdiction (or group of jurisdictions).

There are techniques for improving witness IDs, relating to police procedures.

To fight against false confessions, the usual suggestion is to video record all police interrogation of suspects, rather than confessions only. In light of recent possible cases of unjustified use of force by police, video recording of all police interaction with suspects or arrestees would be appropriate.

There is room for improvement in the public defender or court appointed defender programs in a number of US jurisdictions.

 

[acbytesla]

Slightly off topic, but I watched Gone Girl last night - and in the film they did a luminol sweep and found what they presumed to be blood. And then immediately stated that they had confirmed this was blood and confirmed the blood type/antibodies - and were waiting on the DNA results. It made me think that even Hollywood has a better grip on forensic science

That stuff drives me crazy. Just how they get forensic results in seconds. A lot of bull so they don't bore everyone to death.

 

[kwill]

An arch douche (geddit?)

Hmmm. I think that when a truly stupid & slightly cruel person is behaving archly, you get a douche.

It's the particular mix of meanness, thick-headedness and pompous conceit that produces the result, douche.

(and yes, goddit.)

 

[Numbers]

The factors involved in wrongful convictions include but may not be limited to:
1. Official misconduct (by police and/or prosecutor; rarely the judge)
2. False or misleading forensic evidence
3. Perjury or false accusation
4. Mistaken witness identification
5. False confession
6. Inadequate legal defense

(I borrowed this list from the National Registry of Exonerations:
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/browse.aspx)

Increasing the safety of convictions would seem to require efforts to improve reliability or checks and balances in each of these six factors.

In some ways, improving forensics seems relatively easy, because there should be scientific procedures to judge reliability and technical means for improvement. LCN DNA profiling is generally not accepted in the US, AFAIK.

To combat official misconduct, approaches may include open prosecution case files to prevent violations of Brady (discovery) and perhaps an "Inspector General of Prosecutions" or conviction reliability officer covering each jurisdiction (or group of jurisdictions).

There are techniques for improving witness IDs, relating to police procedures.

To fight against false confessions, the usual suggestion is to video record all police interrogation of suspects, rather than confessions only. In light of recent possible cases of unjustified use of force by police, video recording of all police interaction with suspects or arrestees would be appropriate.

There is room for improvement in the public defender or court appointed defender programs in a number of US jurisdictions.

One factor not included in the above is the use sometimes of adverse publicity campaigns, which may include false allegations, to defame defendants and even influence jurors.

For example, the false accusation of murder and rape against an American female student - Amanda Knox - in a foreign country - Italy - and the wave of adverse publicity and character assassination instigated by the prosecution, accompanied by an incredibly flawed police investigation and perversely flawed extended series of trials has been the motivation for interest in the US in the Meredith Kercher murder case.

Most (not all) of the US miscarriages of justice I have read about, and there are 1,465 exonerations (1989-current date) now tracked in the National Registry of Exonerations, have been carried out with relatively little publicity by the prosecution. That is one of the key differences between the Knox-Sollecito miscarriage and those many others in the US.

 

[carbonjam72]

A further note...
My own strong interest in this case only began with the publicity in January, 2014, following the Nencini court (the new 2nd level trial) conviction of AK and RS. Since both had been acquitted on the same evidence by the 1st 2nd level trial, and AK was in the US, the question of her 5th amendment rights v. extradition was prominent. Supposed legal experts pronounced opposing views on this in the media.

I began some research on US extradition law. I looked into what the case was all about.

I heard Dershowitz's comments and tried to understand his view. After additional reading I concluded he had not fully and clearly expressed all that was known about the evidence and its total lack of reliability. Some effort is required to follow the issues with the DNA evidence.

It was the same for me. I remember the initial conviction and thinking it was a miscarriage of justice, looking at that poor girl and thinking her life had been stolen. But what could I or anyone do? So I swallowed it.

Then came the appeal. And I saw Amanda plead for her life, and win her freedom, and I thought, wow, she was wronged, but at least she has her freedom now.

At that point I had a fair bit of knowledge, but not more than a passing understanding that there had been a miscarriage of justice.

Then the case was reversed by ISC, sent back down for re-trial, and I started paying attention.

Then I saw Nencini. And I knew it was phoney. I saw them read the opinion in court, and not speaking Italian, I had to study the Kercher family reaction, and even then I didn't realize there had been a re-conviction.

At that point, I became invested. I started posting comments on articles, trying to understand how anyone could believe they were guilty. I tried to engage guilters to understand what they thought they were looking at, because it made no god damn sense. I started reading the books that had been written, watching the docs, and then came across this blog.

I think I've gone through most of what I can, although there's plenty of research I could do still. But I think I've got most of what I needed, what I needed to get. What I needed to be able to write about this case, something I feel compelled to do. Can't really explain it, it just gets me.

 

[Numbers]

One factor not included in the above is the use sometimes of adverse publicity campaigns, which may include false allegations, to defame defendants and even influence jurors.

For example, the false accusation of murder and rape against an American female student - Amanda Knox - in a foreign country - Italy - and the wave of adverse publicity and character assassination instigated by the prosecution, accompanied by an incredibly flawed police investigation and perversely flawed extended series of trials has been the motivation for interest in the US in the Meredith Kercher murder case.

Most (not all) of the US miscarriages of justice I have read about, and there are 1,465 exonerations (1989-current date) now tracked in the National Registry of Exonerations, have been carried out with relatively little publicity by the prosecution. That is one of the key differences between the Knox-Sollecito miscarriage and those many others in the US.

There have been many US miscarriages of justice similar to the Amanda Knox - Raffaele Sollecito miscarriage in Italy, involving many of the same elements such as official misconduct by police and prosecutors: hiding exculpatory evidence, obtaining false forensic evidence, committing perjury, extracting false confessions or statements, finding non-police witnesses to testify to falsehoods, and spreading false adverse publicity. There may have even been a few instances here of the kind of incredible disregard of law and fair trial practice shown by the Italian judges.

 

[Desert Fox]

Most (not all) of the US miscarriages of justice I have read about, and there are 1,465 exonerations (1989-current date) now tracked in the National Registry of Exonerations, have been carried out with relatively little publicity by the prosecution. That is one of the key differences between the Knox-Sollecito miscarriage and those many others in the US.

The only one that even comes close as far as publicity is the West Memphis Three. That is only because the HBO crew that was there and their three documentaries.

 

[carbonjam72]

There has been much talk about the police protecting Rudy. But the fact that Rudy was prosecuted and convicted should dismiss that theory. They aren't going to be putting their own careers at risk to protect somebody unless the person is important or holds some control over them. A person like Mignini would be protected at all costs.

Guess I have to disagree, though I'm sure you're not surprised as I've been one of those arguing that position.

The fact that the police freed Guede from Milan police, and had him returned to Perugia 5 days before Rudy killed Meredith, is a pretty good reason to deflect suspicion away from Guede.

For Guede to be fully responsible, is to admit that the Kercher killing is 100% an Italian problem. Not just that because of Italian incompetence, one foreign student lost her life, but that a second foreign student lost her freedom. I don't think Raf's freedom even counts in their view; he's Italian, they own him, his life is theirs to take if they want it. They do that all the time to Italian citizens.

Guede getting his sentence reduced on appeal from life (30 years), to 24 years, meant his fast track reduction would take him down to 16 years - with the possibility of parole. If he had not had his life sentenced (guaranteed 30 years - no parole?) reduced to 24 years, I believe he would only have been eligible for parole, down from his mandatory thirty years (Is that correct?), as reward for his doing a fast track trial. Seems like Rudy was plenty protected by the police.

The argument it seems to me is not that the police protected Rudy for Rudy's own sake, but because they are responsible for Rudy being free to kill. His crimes are their crimes.

There are so many other reasons supporting this argument, which I'm pretty sure I've made and you've read. So if you're still not convinced, or at least hesitant or intrigued, don't know what more I can add that would help.

And Mignini most certainly is expendable. When he embarrassed the judiciary over imprisoning Spezi in April of 2006, they brought him up on charges for abuse of office. But Mignini wouldn't go quietly, and kept filing his crazy MOF cases. Including this one. In this way, Mignini blackmailed the Italian judiciary into promoting him, by continuing to file crazy cases. Mignini won, for the moment. But they were ready to send both Mignini and Giutarri to jail in disgrace. The fact that the charges were dismissed for jurisdiction, and NOT refiled, shows you that the charges are just a way of keeping score. Justice in Italy, is not about justice.

 

[carbonjam72]

No offence taken and your sentiments are good ones. I am unashamedly against the death penalty; a Presidential endorsement of the fact of a wrongful execution would go a long way to ending this barbaric practice. As you point out: "battles for the living". I'd like to help keep states from killing convicts in the future, particularly if their convictions are unsafe. It provides more time to fight for exonerations, amongst other things.

But Willingham had family, no? Don't they have a right to know, and have it be known, that their loved one was an innocent man?

What's missing is accountability. It shouldn't be an option to not admit a mistake has been made. And there should be a regularized process fro recognizing such errors.

I agree there should be no capital punishment, anywhere. It's a barbarous relic from the past. The least restrictive response to crime necessary to prevent recurrence, is best, and least costly (obviously imo).

People make mistakes. Both prosecutors and the prosecuted. There are true criminals. But we don't have to be.

 

[platonov]

Hopefully this is the right level.

.

Guess I have to disagree, though I'm sure you're not surprised as I've been one of those arguing that position.

The fact that the police freed Guede from Milan police, and had him returned to Perugia 5 days before Rudy killed Meredith, is a pretty good reason to deflect suspicion away from Guede.

For Guede to be fully responsible, is to admit that the Kercher killing is 100% an Italian problem. Not just that because of Italian incompetence, one foreign student lost her life, but that a second foreign student lost her freedom. I don't think Raf's freedom even counts in their view; he's Italian, they own him, his life is theirs to take if they want it. They do that all the time to Italian citizens.

Guede getting his sentence reduced on appeal from life (30 years), to 24 years, meant his fast track reduction would take him down to 16 years - with the possibility of parole. If he had not had his life sentenced (guaranteed 30 years - no parole?) reduced to 24 years, I believe he would only have been eligible for parole, down from his mandatory thirty years (Is that correct?), as reward for his doing a fast track trial. Seems like Rudy was plenty protected by the police.

The argument it seems to me is not that the police protected Rudy for Rudy's own sake, but because they are responsible for Rudy being free to kill. His crimes are their crimes.

There are so many other reasons supporting this argument, which I'm pretty sure I've made and you've read. So if you're still not convinced, or at least hesitant or intrigued, don't know what more I can add that would help.

And Mignini most certainly is expendable. When he embarrassed the judiciary over imprisoning Spezi in April of 2006, they brought him up on charges for abuse of office. But Mignini wouldn't go quietly, and kept filing his crazy MOF cases. Including this one. In this way, Mignini blackmailed the Italian judiciary into promoting him, by continuing to file crazy cases. Mignini won, for the moment. But they were ready to send both Mignini and Giutarri to jail in disgrace. The fact that the charges were dismissed for jurisdiction, and NOT refiled, shows you that the charges are just a way of keeping score. Justice in Italy, is not about justice.

No chance.

He's Kang's guy.

 

[Numbers]

Guess I have to disagree, though I'm sure you're not surprised as I've been one of those arguing that position.

The fact that the police freed Guede from Milan police, and had him returned to Perugia 5 days before Rudy killed Meredith, is a pretty good reason to deflect suspicion away from Guede.
For Guede to be fully responsible, is to admit that the Kercher killing is 100% an Italian problem. Not just that because of Italian incompetence, one foreign student lost her life, but that a second foreign student lost her freedom. I don't think Raf's freedom even counts in their view; he's Italian, they own him, his life is theirs to take if they want it. They do that all the time to Italian citizens.

Guede getting his sentence reduced on appeal from life (30 years), to 24 years, meant his fast track reduction would take him down to 16 years - with the possibility of parole. If he had not had his life sentenced (guaranteed 30 years - no parole?) reduced to 24 years, I believe he would only have been eligible for parole, down from his mandatory thirty years (Is that correct?), as reward for his doing a fast track trial. Seems like Rudy was plenty protected by the police.

The argument it seems to me is not that the police protected Rudy for Rudy's own sake, but because they are responsible for Rudy being free to kill. His crimes are their crimes.

There are so many other reasons supporting this argument, which I'm pretty sure I've made and you've read. So if you're still not convinced, or at least hesitant or intrigued, don't know what more I can add that would help.

And Mignini most certainly is expendable. When he embarrassed the judiciary over imprisoning Spezi in April of 2006, they brought him up on charges for abuse of office. But Mignini wouldn't go quietly, and kept filing his crazy MOF cases. Including this one. In this way, Mignini blackmailed the Italian judiciary into promoting him, by continuing to file crazy cases. Mignini won, for the moment. But they were ready to send both Mignini and Giutarri to jail in disgrace. The fact that the charges were dismissed for jurisdiction, and NOT refiled, shows you that the charges are just a way of keeping score. Justice in Italy, is not about justice.

1. Rudy Guede may have been rescued from Milan police by the Perugia police because of the wealthy family who had been his official foster parents, although there's also the possibility he was an police informant. But it clear that the Perugia police were protecting him from accountability for his "minor" crimes of burglary and theft.

2. The prosecution of Mignini for abuse of office is an example of the lack of accountability - impunity - of Italian officials and police. When the judicial system moved his trial to Florence, the judiciary should have been aware of the conflict of interest situation that would result. By this bit of trickery, the Italian judiciary has, IIUC, run out the statute of limitations on the abuse of power charges for Mignini. He is now free to pursue his obsessions, but apparently promoted away from an ability to harm (one hopes).

 

[acbytesla]

No, what? Just for clarity, I you referring to an innocent person or a person who didn't get a fair trial? It appears that the Constitution does not prohibit the execution of an actually-innocent person following a fair trial in which he has been adjudicated guilty. Doesn't seem right, but remember the Constitution predates modern times.

The 5th amendment of the US Constitution states

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

It says nothing about whether someone is innocent or guilty. It assumes that if the due process declares someone guilty that is enough. That should be enough. The problem is the process is not always fair.

 

[Diocletus]

I'm sorry. This one brings the case up to date and probably hasn't appeared here before:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/na...ts-over-a-texas-execution/?wpisrc=al_national

Interesting. And look what I see: another evil, rogue prosecutor cheating the system. Sounds like mignini's m.o.

 

[carbonjam72]

1. Rudy Guede may have been rescued from Milan police by the Perugia police because of the wealthy family who had been his official foster parents, although there's also the possibility he was an police informant. But it clear that the Perugia police were protecting him from accountability for his "minor" crimes of burglary and theft.
2. The prosecution of Mignini for abuse of office is an example of the lack of accountability - impunity - of Italian officials and police. When the judicial system moved his trial to Florence, the judiciary should have been aware of the conflict of interest situation that would result. By this bit of trickery, the Italian judiciary has, IIUC, run out the statute of limitations on the abuse of power charges for Mignini. He is now free to pursue his obsessions, but apparently promoted away from an ability to harm (one hopes).

On 1. - I'm not aware of any contact between the wealthy family (caporelli?) in Perugia that had "adopted" Rudy Guede, and then "disowned" him for the most part, and the intervention with the Milan police. While its certainly a decent enough hypothesis to look in the factual record for confirmation of some kind, there's nothing I'm aware of that supports this line of inquiry. So its not even a viable theory yet, IMO, just pure conjecture.

The second, highlighted is my view, based on Steve Moore's conjecture, and the behavior and record of Mignini and the Perugians with regard to Guede.

On 2. - A deliberate tanking of the case is I suppose a possibility. The funny part of this affair, is that Paolo Canessa (?) the prosecutor in Florence, was a target of Mignini's wiretaps that caused the charges, and also responsible for prosecuting Mignini's failed MOF cases, AND prosecuting Mignini! They've got a flow chart going on in Florence, like Woody Allen's family tree.

But the case was removed to Turin, and could have been refiled. But they chose not to. They could have refiled, it didn't have to get tanked. Also, and I'm not an expert here, but under some legal systems with a statute of limitations in place, the statute can be "tolled", that is suspended for certain reasons. So the clock can be suspended for a time to allow the administration of justice, and avoid the scenario where criminals simply delay proceedings to intentionally run out the clock. Not sure how it works in Italy though.

But trying and convicting Mignini and Giutarri is a huge public embarrassment to them and the police. The importance of saving face suggests to me that tanking the case was not the intention of prosecuting and convicting Mignini and Giutarri, even if they knew that might be an outcome, As seems to be a common refrain, we are left wondering, "how dumb are they really?".

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The motion to compel discovery in the Duke lacrosse case

On 13 December 2006 the defense attorneys for the Duke lacrosse three filed a motion to compel discovery. The lead author was apparently Brad Bannon. I found this passage most interesting:

"40...There are significant gaps in the item sequence numbers…
41....The worksheet shows that the DNA extraction was performed n July 12, 2006, on that item, as well as items labeled “16074C” and “16075C,” which are nowhere otherwise identified in the DNA Security materials. But on this worksheet itself, under the “name” column, someone typed “Bobby” and “Owen.” “Quantification Worksheet Q-181”75 and “PCR Worksheet Number A-464”⁷⁶ reflect quantification & amplification work on those three extractions the following day, July 14, 2006. “Analysis Worksheet Number G-592” reflects analysis of those extractions the following day, July 14, 2006. But nowhere in the materials do the DNA profiles generated from those analyses appear. The phenomenon repeats itself throughout the underlying materials from DNA security.⁷⁷"

The relevance to the present case is obvious.

 

[Numbers]

The 5th amendment of the US Constitution states



It says nothing about whether someone is innocent or guilty. It assumes that if the due process declares someone guilty that is enough. That should be enough. The problem is the process is not always fair.

There is no due process of law, or equal protection of the law (14th amendment) if there has been official misconduct by police, forensic lab, prosecutor, or judge. And this misconduct may be as simple as withholding a key bit of exculpatory evidence from the defense.

 

[acbytesla]

There is no due process of law, or equal protection of the law (14th amendment) if there has been official misconduct by police, forensic lab, prosecutor, or judge. And this misconduct may be as simple as withholding a key bit of exculpatory evidence from the defense.

I agree and I'm pretty sure that the US Supreme Court would say that the defendant did not receive "due process" and over-rule the lower court. But they may ask if that misconduct had anything to do with the verdict.