Continuation Part 11: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

This is more pro-guilt lobby nonsense.

What the pro-guilt lobby says is Raffaele "withdrawing his alibi", is well covered in his written appeal to Cassation and is anything but.

What he is saying, and what he said at the press conference, is this: if they are going to convict Amanda on the basis of her not being at his apartment, what does that have to do with him?

Please read what is before Cassation as we type. He also says, as he said at the press conference, that he knows that Amanda is innocent, because apart from what Nencini said, and apart from what the pro-guilt lobby has said - Amanda was, in fact, with him.

Read the English language version of his appeal document, or if you speak Italian, it's in Italian....

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Appeal.html

The thing is that argument is not hard to understand but it seems like the pro guilt side just seems unable to understand the simple argument. I got it in about thirty seconds (or less)

 

[Numbers]

What testimony of RS are you referring to?

Hint – his testimony is in the same realm as the ‘alibi’ he gave AK i.e. nonexistent

Perhaps while reviewing this ‘testimony’ you missed his press conference!

This is more pro-guilt lobby nonsense.

What the pro-guilt lobby says is Raffaele "withdrawing his alibi", is well covered in his written appeal to Cassation and is anything but.

What he is saying, and what he said at the press conference, is this: if they are going to convict Amanda on the basis of her not being at his apartment, what does that have to do with him?

Please read what is before Cassation as we type. He also says, as he said at the press conference, that he knows that Amanda is innocent, because apart from what Nencini said, and apart from what the pro-guilt lobby has said - Amanda was, in fact, with him.

Read the English language version of his appeal document, or if you speak Italian, it's in Italian....

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Appeal.html

IIRC, Raffaele did not testify in court, at least during the first-level trial.

He continues to maintain the same alibi as before; in the press conference, he was speaking about an erroneous statement by the Nencini court (not by Raffaele) in its motivation report.

Raffaele's and Amanda's appeals to the CSC, in Italian, are at:

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RICORSO_SOLLECITO_9.6.2014.pdf
(342 pages)

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/AmandaKnoxAppeal2014.pdf
(118 pages)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

spontaneous declarations

Raffaele did not testify, but he did make about five spontaneous statements IIRC.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I do not believe that is so. QuickTime knows how to access the CODECs within other applications. If you installed VLC the movie will play within QuickTime.

I tested this just a minute ago with a .mkv format file. Quicktime would not open it. VLC opened it fine.

I don't have access to a mac running Raffaele's exact version of Quicktime, nor to Raffaele's exact rip of Naruto episode 101, so obviously I can only speculate as to whether that machine could or would play that file using Quicktime. The avi wrapper can contain a number of file formats, I believe, so given only the fact that it was an avi file I cannot determine which application(s) could play it.

As you say, the record of what files were last played with an application has sometimes been buggy, and that is a possible alternative explanation of how a file could have been played without it showing up in the VLC record of recently played files.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

It's disingenuous on your part to suggest I should publish my own research:

Hmm.

On reflection, perhaps it is.

 

[Desert Fox]

I tested this just a minute ago with a .mkv format file. Quicktime would not open it. VLC opened it fine.

I don't have access to a mac running Raffaele's exact version of Quicktime, nor to Raffaele's exact rip of Naruto episode 101, so obviously I can only speculate as to whether that machine could or would play that file using Quicktime. The avi wrapper can contain a number of file formats, I believe, so given only the fact that it was an avi file I cannot determine which application(s) could play it.

As you say, the record of what files were last played with an application has sometimes been buggy, and that is a possible alternative explanation of how a file could have been played without it showing up in the VLC record of recently played files.

Were there any applications available for Apple in 2007 for play videos?
I know that there were several available for PCs at that time

 

[Machiavelli]

Raffaele did not testify, but he did make about five spontaneous statements IIRC.

Sollecito testified before Matteini and Ricciarelli. On those occasions he did not provide an alibi to Amanda Knox. That one is his last position before a judicial organ.
Then, on December 22. 2007 he refused to answer the questions before Mignini.
He never testified in the trial.

 

[Bill Williams]

Sollecito testified before Matteini and Ricciarelli. On those occasions he did not provide an alibi to Amanda Knox. That one is his last position before a judicial organ.
Then, on December 22. 2007 he refused to answer the questions before Mignini.
He never testified in the trial.

What do you suppose this means.

He also did not profess a love for peanut butter. Therefore we can conclude he does not like peanut butter. Extra points if you spot the logical fallacy.

 

[christianahannah]

Sollecito testified before Matteini and Ricciarelli. On those occasions he did not provide an alibi to Amanda Knox. That one is his last position before a judicial organ.
Then, on December 22. 2007 he refused to answer the questions before Mignini.
He never testified in the trial.

As for the spontaneous declarations of Raffaele and Amanda (and others in other cases); what weight are they usually given in a trial? Any? Can a defendent give as many as they want or should they be cautious in what they respond to?

 

[platonov]

As for the spontaneous declarations of Raffaele and Amanda (and others in other cases); what weight are they usually given in a trial? Any? Can a defendent give as many as they want or should they be cautious in what they respond to?

Funnily enough, although I strongly suspect there is no hard & fast rule as regards your Q, his declarations were part of the reasoning behind the decision to disallow his appeal request to split his defence from AK’s.

It’s not Columbo [or Bonanza].

 

[Numbers]

IIRC, Raffaele did not testify in court, at least during the first-level trial.

He continues to maintain the same alibi as before; in the press conference, he was speaking about an erroneous statement by the Nencini court (not by Raffaele) in its motivation report.

Raffaele's and Amanda's appeals to the CSC, in Italian, are at:

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RICORSO_SOLLECITO_9.6.2014.pdf
(342 pages)

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/AmandaKnoxAppeal2014.pdf
(118 pages)

For Raffaele's appeal to CSC, I attempted to Google translate some of the first paragraphs. I edited some myself, where Google Translate (GT) left the words in Italian, not because I know Italian, but because I have a sense of what this may be saying in English. My edits are marked with (?), and GT words I think don't fit are struck out. Here it is:


REQUEST FOR ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED CRIMINAL SECTIONS
In view of the fact that some of the issues addressed in the present action, appear special importance or which, however, could give rise to a conflict of case law, it asks whether Articles. 610, paragraph 2, and 618 Code of Criminal Procedure the assignment of the use of the United Criminal Sections [Penalty].

1) Scientific Evidence
The first question that requires a ruling of the United Sections regards
the probative value of the scientific evidence or circumstantial, allor when both in the presence of an investigation involving a high technical difficulty, but it was done disregarding international recommendations regarding treatment of evidence (?) and data interpretation.
In this respect, it is necessary to assess whether this controversial result (?) [figure], taken in violation of methods strongly recommended by the Community international scientific (eg. those issued by the International Society Forensic Genetics as regards the analysis of traces of DNA) has probative value (?) [relief] or is not probative.

 

[platonov]

A measure of life

The thing is that argument is not hard to understand but it seems like the pro guilt side just seems unable to understand the simple argument. I got it in about thirty seconds (or less)

I doubt I'll live long enough to get it

 

[Dan O.]

Were there any applications available for Apple in 2007 for play videos?
I know that there were several available for PCs at that time

You mean other than the three that have already been discussed and were known to be on Raffaele's computer at the time.

 

[Numbers]

Defendants allowed to lie in Italian courts?

As for the spontaneous declarations of Raffaele and Amanda (and others in other cases); what weight are they usually given in a trial? Any? Can a defendent give as many as they want or should they be cautious in what they respond to?

IIUC, criminal defendants are allowed to (expected to?) lie when testifying in Italian courts. Therefore, if this is indeed Italian jurisprudence, I would expect that nothing a defendant says that pertains to objective fact - as testimony or spontaneous declaration - that is not otherwise substantiated would be taken as the truth. Perhaps certain subjective statements, such as expressions of emotions, would be considered to be truthful, if they corresponded with the expectations of the judges.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Not true bolint.
She remembered PL [the other black guy] raping & killing MK.

And at a recent press conference RS remembered that he wasn’t sure if AK was in or out on the ‘night’ of the murder.
He certainly remembered that he wasn’t claiming her as an alibi.

-

Show me exactly where in her (Amanda's) confession, she describes PL raping and murdering Meredith.

You can't, because that confession doesn't have one detail of either happening. It is the worst confession I have ever read in my life. It sounds like she wasn't even there,

d

-

 

[AmyStrange]

-

I tend to have documentaries playing in the background when I am doing something. . . . My ability to remember what shows I had playing a few days before is pretty poor at best.

-

Ok DF. who did you kill? You must have killed someone if you can't remember what happened a couple days ago,

d

-

 

[Desert Fox]

You mean other than the three that have already been discussed and were known to be on Raffaele's computer at the time.

Yes but I only remember reading about two - Quicktime and VLC

 

[Desert Fox]

Ok DF. who did you kill? You must have killed someone if you can't remember what happened a couple days ago,

I think I might have killed a bug or two. . . . . Does that count?

 

[Desert Fox]

Show me exactly where in her (Amanda's) confession, she describes PL raping and murdering Meredith.

You can't, because that confession doesn't have one detail of either happening. It is the worst confession I have ever read in my life. It sounds like she wasn't even there,

The only trouble is that I have heard confessions almost as bad, how about Jessie Misskelley. It looked like the authorities were leading him through the "confession." They still convicted him.

 

[Dan O.]

Yes but I only remember reading about two - Quicktime and VLC

I get this from the Expert's Report on or about page 20:

Finally it is pointed out that among the last operations made on the computer before 8 am on November 2, 2007, boundary of the time interval of interest, there is an
interaction due to activation/deactivation of Front Row, which is able to play songs and videos by downloading them from the web on temporary files which are then deleted.
A few minutes after the deactivation of the keyboard at 6.22.28 am on November 2, that is at 6.38 am, an interaction with the “DVDPlayback” file is detected, which hints at the presence in the laptop of a DVD containing videos or music, clearly undetectable by programs like ENCASE
since the related files and their dates are not modified.

Front Row 02/11/2007 6:18:33 (Last Accessed Date according to ENCASE)
DVDPlayback 02/11/2007 6:38:40 33 (Last Accessed Date according to ENCASE)​