Continuation Part 11: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

Bill Williams wrote:
"One of the intents of those English-language boards is to effect influence in the US around extradition."

Yes, I believe that would be one of the primary intents - the other is merely the expression of their pathological hatred(s).

 

[Bill Williams]

Why not? Because it's an appeal to Cassazione. That court is not the place to ask for re-testing. The appropriate ground of appeal would be to attack Nencini's refusal to order re-testing (e.g. 165B) or new testing (e.g. audio-metric test of Nara's place)

And that point I cannot detect using Google translate. Unless it is an issue of ferreting out that kind of info with Google translate (which it very well could be!) there does not appear to be a bit in it on Nencini's refusal - OR objecting Nencini's sarcasm.

Actually, I was referring to Raffaele's appeal and making the possibly unfair assumption that it was tarted up in the same sort of lingo Galati used. All these Italian documents read badly IMO. They are too long, over-complicated, pseudo-intellectual, specious and pretentious. Apart from that, they're fine.

Ok, you WERE being sarcastic.

For eight innings, Yankee's catcher Yogi Berra responded to the umpires' balls and strikes with profanity, and words like, "You're blind." Each and every pitch that did not go the Yankees' way, earned the umpire a bit of venom from Berra.

On the first pitch of the ninth inning, a pitch which was obviously in the strike zone was called a ball.

This time, Berra turned around, took off his mask and said, "I just wanted you to know that I agreed with your call on that one."

The umpire immediately threw Berra out of the game. Why? For sarcasm.

Who reads these documents if the session set aside for Cassazione's consideration is only one day?

 

[anglolawyer]

Lots of people are members of various discussion groups, so what? It’s not like membership of a English speaking discussion group has any effect on the case in Italy.

Coulsdon, why do you bother saying the same thing over and over again? I get it. I'm sure we all get it. We are wasting our time here and deluding ourselves into believing we matter. Fine. Just turn that into your signature and save yourself the trouble of repeatedly typing it.

 

[anglolawyer]

And that point I cannot detect using Google translate. Unless it is an issue of ferreting out that kind of info with Google translate (which it very well could be!) there does not appear to be a bit in it on Nencini's refusal - OR objecting Nencini's sarcasm.

Ok, you WERE being sarcastic.

For eight innings, Yankee's catcher Yogi Berra responded to the umpires' balls and strikes with profanity, and words like, "You're blind." Each and every pitch that did not go the Yankees' way, earned the umpire a bit of venom from Berra.

On the first pitch of the ninth inning, a pitch which was obviously in the strike zone was called a ball.

This time, Berra turned around, took off his mask and said, "I just wanted you to know that I agreed with your call on that one."

The umpire immediately threw Berra out of the game. Why? For sarcasm.

Who reads these documents if the session set aside for Cassazione's consideration is only one day?

I thought Yogi Berra was a cartoon set in Yosemite park. The one with that other guy, er, Barney Rubble.

 

[Dan O.]

Coulsdon, why do you bother saying the same thing over and over again? I get it. I'm sure we all get it. We are wasting our time here and deluding ourselves into believing we matter. Fine. Just turn that into your signature and save yourself the trouble of repeatedly typing it.

We can justify our business here. We are interested in the case and occasionally reveal something new when not being recycled into endless repetition by the clueless on the other side. But why is Coulsdon here if he feels so strongly that the our online endeavor is pointless? This smacks hypocrisy right in his face.

 

[MDDVS]

Just put him on ignore like I did a long time ago.

 

[Bill Williams]

I thought Yogi Berra was a cartoon set in Yosemite park. The one with that other guy, er, Barney Rubble.

You have a sorry grasp of classical English literature. It's Jellystone Park. The education system is failing us......

 

[Bill Williams]

We can justify our business here. We are interested in the case and occasionally reveal something new when not being recycled into endless repetition by the clueless on the other side. But why is Coulsdon here if he feels so strongly that the our online endeavor is pointless? This smacks hypocrisy right in his face.

CoulsdonUK seems fixated on trying to understand the specifics of the Italian process, which is not altogether a bad thing.

 

[Numbers]

Lots of people are members of various discussion groups, so what? It’s not like membership of a English speaking discussion group has any effect on the case in Italy.

CoulsdonUK seems fixated on trying to understand the specifics of the Italian process, which is not altogether a bad thing.

The Italian judicial system has elements that outsiders may not have an easy time understanding. It has a political element, I believe, that influences judgments far more than the evidence or reason. Some of the Italian judges may have the kind of nationalism that sees criticism of the Italian judicial system as grounds for defiance. Thus support of Knox and Sollecito outside Italy, in the US or elsewhere, may motivate those nationalists to find the defendants guilty despite the lack of credible evidence.

 

[Bill Williams]

The Italian judicial system has elements that outsiders may not have an easy time understanding. It has a political element, I believe, that influences judgments far more than the evidence or reason. Some of the Italian judges may have the kind of nationalism that sees criticism of the Italian judicial system as grounds for defiance.

From its sheer size, how can the Italian judiciary be exempt from political forces, both internal and external?

Hellmann: the party of the PMs is strong. (Strong enough presumably to turn burden of proof on its head.)

Acc. to many, the American 2000 presidential election was decided on political grounds, SCOTUS voting along party lines to cease recounts in Florida.

 

[Samson]

CoulsdonUK seems fixated on trying to understand the specifics of the Italian process, which is not altogether a bad thing.

CoulsdonUK is unique as a contributor who has never shown the slightest interest in what happened, but supports the Kerchers. Of course he would not explain why he supports people who also show not the slightest interest in what happened.
People who refuse to discuss evidence appear this way to me.

 

[Desert Fox]

The Italian judicial system has elements that outsiders may not have an easy time understanding. It has a political element, I believe, that influences judgments far more than the evidence or reason. Some of the Italian judges may have the kind of nationalism that sees criticism of the Italian judicial system as grounds for defiance. Thus support of Knox and Sollecito outside Italy, in the US or elsewhere, may motivate those nationalists to find the defendants guilty despite the lack of credible evidence.

In the US, judges and prosecutors are more interested in themselves. . . .Either getting higher in the food chain or pleasing their constituents.

I am sure that there is some of that in Italy but it goes far beyond that. Ths might be described as a sort of judicial activist but not like you get some in US courts with personal rights issues (Gay marriage). Also, they have to defend such decisions by using laws and/or constitution.

One thing I note is that in US courts, they usually treat foreign defendants with kid gloves. There is concern with prejudice which few courts would like to be accused of. If Amanda was an Italian going to school in the US, they would be really cautious prosecution her. In the US, we like to prosecute our own actually.

 

[Vibio]

In the US, we like to prosecute our own actually.

Oh dear. Well it's always good for laughs around here.

The fact is foreigners make up more than 25% of the US prison population.

With all those privatized prisons, beds must be filled....

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/23/6_shocking_revelations_about_how_private_prisons_make_money_partner/

Oh and an even bigger laugh was the talk about Knox being hit and how that's going to really pee them off over at the ECHR.

I guess Knoxer's own lawyer should have keep his mouth shut when he spilled the beans telling reporters that she was never hit. I mean, it really doesn't help the cause.

And anyway: according to the ECHR, Knoxer has to show that she's persued this issue first in Italy...soooo would someone please post her formal complaint about police brutality?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Coulsdon, why do you bother saying the same thing over and over again? I get it. I'm sure we all get it. We are wasting our time here and deluding ourselves into believing we matter. Fine. Just turn that into your signature and save yourself the trouble of repeatedly typing it.

I am repetitive.

That describes the entire thread and everyone currently posting on it.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

a body that is unaccountably absent from the justice system

Amnesty International's 2007 report on Italy stated in part: "Italy still failed to make torture, as defined in the UN Convention against Torture, a specific crime within its penal code. There was no independent police complaints and accountability body. Policing operations were not in line with the European Code of Police Ethics, for example in the requirement for officers to display prominently some form of identification, such as a service number, to ensure they could be held accountable."

 

[Samson]

Oh dear. Well it's always good for laughs around here.

The fact is foreigners make up more than 25% of the US prison population.

With all those privatized prisons, beds must be filled....

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/23/6_shocking_revelations_about_how_private_prisons_make_money_partner/

Oh and an even bigger laugh was the talk about Knox being hit and how that's going to really pee them off over at the ECHR.

I guess Knoxer's own lawyer should have keep his mouth shut when he spilled the beans telling reporters that she was never hit. I mean, it really doesn't help the cause.

And anyway: according to the ECHR, Knoxer has to show that she's persued this issue first in Italy...soooo would someone please post her formal complaint about police brutality?

Ah but as a citizen of Perugia would you make a formal complaint if you were
mistreated by the police?
There's a good old yes or no question to answer.

 

[Numbers]

From its sheer size, how can the Italian judiciary be exempt from political forces, both internal and external?

Hellmann: the party of the PMs is strong. (Strong enough presumably to turn burden of proof on its head.)

Acc. to many, the American 2000 presidential election was decided on political grounds, SCOTUS voting along party lines to cease recounts in Florida.

Not to go off thread, but there is a difference. A court deciding about an election will be (almost certainly) seen as being political, because of the nature of the decision and what is involved - a part of the political process. The US Supreme court is chosen through a political process, one balanced between the other two branches of government - a new judge is nominated by the President, but must be approved a majority of the Senate to be approved. And an appointed judge serves indefinitely during "good conduct," so he or she doesn't need to respond to political pressure.

But the Italian courts here are dealing with a murder case, with no inherent political content in the usual sense - Meredith, Amanda, and Raffaele were not involved in any political contest or rivalry. The politics here are internal to the Italian judiciary.

 

[anglolawyer]

I am repetitive.

That describes the entire thread and everyone currently posting on it.

It's true that some topics come round repeatedly but the discussion evolves nonetheless. No one has a gun to your head. If it's too repetitious you are free to stay away. Come to think of it, why are you posting here anyway?

 

[Numbers]

Ah but as a citizen of Perugia would you make a formal complaint if you were
mistreated by the police?
There's a good old yes or no question to answer.

There is the equivalent of a complaint in the original statement Amanda made (directed to the prosecutor, IIRC) and in each of the appeals. The ECtHR looks at the substance of issues, not merely at the formalities. They are concerned with assuring that human rights are enjoyed in a practical as well as a theoretical sense. They repeat statements about this in, it seems, every judgment.

 

[Kauffer]

Oh dear. Well it's always good for laughs around here.

The fact is foreigners make up more than 25% of the US prison population.

With all those privatized prisons, beds must be filled....

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/23/6_shocking_revelations_about_how_private_prisons_make_money_partner/

Oh and an even bigger laugh was the talk about Knox being hit and how that's going to really pee them off over at the ECHR.

I guess Knoxer's own lawyer should have keep his mouth shut when he spilled the beans telling reporters that she was never hit. I mean, it really doesn't help the cause.

And anyway: according to the ECHR, Knoxer has to show that she's persued this issue first in Italy...soooo would someone please post her formal complaint about police brutality?

You are mistaken.

Ms Knox has appealed to the ECHR in connection with alleged violations of her human rights in respect of the calunia conviction, which has been finalised by the ISC and thus can proceed beyond Italy. Her contention that she was assaulted may well be referenced in her application and she is entitled to do that. However, on becoming aware of Ms Knox's contention that she was assaulted, it was incumbent on the Italians to launch an investigation. They did not. Instead she was pursued in an action for slander as were her parents merely for repeating her contention, to a journalist, but not the journalist himself for writing about it.