Continuation Part 12: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

Yes. What appears to have happened yesterday is nothing more than Gumbel (through his lawyer) asserting that the book is not his intellectual property - the thoughts, opinions and claims are all Sollecito's in origin - and that therefore he should not be held liable in any defamation action. That's all.

Stilicho appears to be "interpreting" events through a rather jaded lens.........

Folk have trouble considering that if two are conamed in the same action, they may have differing avenues of defence available to them. The vultures at PMF just want to cackle.

What I wish they'd address is why Gumbel is named at all, given that John Follain got off scott-free when Mignini similarly targeted Curt/Edda? My bet it was because Follain was an ally of Mignini's.

 

[Numbers]

Folk have trouble considering that if two are conamed in the same action, they may have differing avenues of defence available to them. The vultures at PMF just want to cackle.

What I wish they'd address is why Gumbel is named at all, given that John Follain got off scott-free when Mignini similarly targeted Curt/Edda? My bet it was because Follain was an ally of Mignini's.

Source: http://kellywarnerlaw.com/italy-defamation-laws/

Defamation Laws In Italy
Italian defamation law: Slander and Libel Laws In Italy

Articles 594 and 595 of the Italian Penal Code state defamation can be a civil or criminal offense. If the latter, it is punishable by imprisonment ranging between six months and three years.

Under Article 157 of the Italian Penal Code, the action shall prescribe corresponding to the maximum penalty as expressly stated under Articles 594 and 595 of the Italian Penal Code. By way of illustration, Injury as punishable under Article 594 shall prescribe in six months; Defamation as punishable under Article 595 shall prescribe in three (3) years.

In a report by Article IX, criminal defamation provisions in the Italian Penal Code and its application has been incompatible with basic democratic ideals as well as international guarantees of freedom of expression. These standards establish a fact that “although reputation must be protected from any harm done, it cannot be compensated by sending journalists to jail.” Article IX recommends for the repeal of the criminal defamation laws in Italy, believing that “the reform of the criminal defamation provisions in Italy is long overdue.” This is due to the fact that Article 595 of the 1930 Penal Code of Italy was drawn up at a time when freedom of expression was not seen as a right. The original aim of all criminal defamation laws then was to make criticism against monarchs a criminal offence and to silence dissent. Today, defamation is considered a private matter between two individuals with few public consequences; therefore, any criminal law or regulation with the potential for imprisonment, is inappropriate.

In contrast to U.S., Italian courts protect the nation’s public figures, national organizations and institutions. They’re also not afraid to sentence journalists to prison. Italian courts believe statements that are overly critical about public figures can be viewed as defamatory because they have the potential to undermine public confidence. By way of illustration, the Italian Court have indicted Amanda Knox’s parents for defamation for alleging in a 2008 newspaper interview that Italian police abused Amanda and was allegedly subjected to physical and verbal abuse during a police interrogation in 2007

 

[Welshman]

Listen, there is nothing where I can be wrong in the post you quoted above, since what I am doing is just to explain English-speaking readers what a text in another language says.

Let's not start building strawmen about being wrong and right again, because you can see I am translating a text, not expressing an opinion on the matter.

It is a known fact that no one cannot tell the origin of DNA from simple DNA analysis.
And in fact, this is not what I am talking about.
I am showing: 1. how Berti and Barni apparently draw an inference about DNA originating from "biological fluids of Amanda Marie Knox";
2. how not just Stefanoni but all experts they do draw interpretations of findings, not just based on their discipline of expertise or applying Cartesian doubt, but also considering other external elements (the location of the finding for instance may be one of them);
3. how arguments like assessing the "likeliness" of the presence of Knox's blood, in fact may be developed upon reasons that just belong to the wider scope of the case file, and do not derive from the scientific discipline; they may well originate from some other unrelated evidence (such as suspect's lies for example); evidence and arguments not necessarily have to come from the subject of expertise of the witness: a case is to be judged by judges, not by expert witnesses.
4. the (some) "experts of a field" are not supposed to "tell me I am wrong", they are supposed to convince me they are wrong, with argumentations, and this is a different task; in fact, they should convince a judge by undergoing cross-questionings. But you know something? The best, definitive contribute to my conviction that the knife and bra clasp evidence was sound, was provided by Conti and Vecchiotti; reading their flawed and fraudulent arguments, how they had absolutely nothing but that, it was like them putting an imprimatur seal as a further confirmation to my certainty. If they resorted to those arguments, it means that there is no other argument.

If you think you are about to make Italian forensic a "laughing stock", well, you are welcome to think that; meanwhile you may be interested in some critical reading about, let's say, defence expert "consultant" Bruce Budowle? Us Forensics methodologies? About for example, how Bruce Budowle's laboratory and FBI dept used to refuse to turn over the raw data about the tests they carred on?

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/kelly-evidence.html

Machiavelli constantly accuses C and V of being incompetent and dishonest buffoons which he repeats here. If C and V were so incompetent, why has Machiavelli and other PGP been unable to write a detailed rebuttal of their report which should be extremely easy to do if C and V were clueless idiots.

 

[Numbers]

Defamation and Insult in Italian Law (CP 595 & 594)

Google Translation;
Source: http://www.altalex.com/index.php?idnot=36774

Art. 594.
Insult.

Anyone who offends the honor or dignity of a person present shall be punished with imprisonment up to six months or a fine of up to € 516.
The same punishment who commits made by telegram or telephone, or writings or drawings, direct to the victim.
The penalty is imprisonment up to one year or a fine of up to € 1,032 if the offense is the allocation of a given fact.
The penalties are increased if the offense is committed in the presence of more people.

_______________

See. Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 13 July 2007, n. 27966, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 20 July 2007 n. 29413, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 14 November 2007, n. 42064, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 27 February 2008, n. 8639, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 25 July 2008, n. 31388 and Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 16 September 2009, no. 35880 in Altalex Massimario.

Art. 595.
Defamation.

Anyone, except for the cases mentioned in the previous article, talking to more people, offends the reputation of others, shall be punished with imprisonment up to one year or a fine of up to € 1,032.
If the offense is the allocation [attribution] of a certain fact, the penalty is imprisonment up to two years, or a fine of up to € 2,065.
If the offense went with the press or any other means of advertising or public document, the penalty is imprisonment from six months to three years or a fine not less than € 516.
If the offense went to a political body, administrative or judicial, or to a representative or a constituted authority in college, the penalties are increased.

You See:

Simone Marani, Gossips with different people and on different facts: nothing defamation !, Cass. Criminal sect. V, judgment of 19 April 2013, n. 17978.
Michele Iaselli, offends via the blog is aggravated defamation, Court Varese, office. GIP, judgment of 8 April 2013, n. 116.

_______________

See. Criminal Appeal, sect. V, judgment of 10 March 2008 n. 10735, Criminal Appeal, sect. V, judgment of 31 March 2008, n. 13540, Criminal Appeal, sect. V, judgment of 24 September 2008 n. 36623, Criminal Appeal, sect. III, judgment of 7 January 2009 n. 25, Criminal Appeal, sect. III, judgment of 27 January 2009, no. 1976 Civil Cassation, sez. III, judgment of 11 February 2009 n. 3340, Civil Cassation, sez. tax, judgment of 18 February 2009 n. 7069, the Court of Cassino, the office of the magistrate, judgment of 26 June 2009 Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 16 September 2009, no. 35880, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 23 September 2009 n. 37105, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 24 September 2009 n. 37442, Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 24 November 2009, no. 45051 and Criminal Cassation, sez. V, judgment of 1 December 2009 n. 46077 in Altalex Massimario.

 

[Diocletus]

Source: http://kellywarnerlaw.com/italy-defamation-laws/

Defamation Laws In Italy
Italian defamation law: Slander and Libel Laws In Italy

Articles 594 and 595 of the Italian Penal Code state defamation can be a civil or criminal offense. If the latter, it is punishable by imprisonment ranging between six months and three years.

Under Article 157 of the Italian Penal Code, the action shall prescribe corresponding to the maximum penalty as expressly stated under Articles 594 and 595 of the Italian Penal Code. By way of illustration, Injury as punishable under Article 594 shall prescribe in six months; Defamation as punishable under Article 595 shall prescribe in three (3) years.

In a report by Article IX, criminal defamation provisions in the Italian Penal Code and its application has been incompatible with basic democratic ideals as well as international guarantees of freedom of expression. These standards establish a fact that “although reputation must be protected from any harm done, it cannot be compensated by sending journalists to jail.” Article IX recommends for the repeal of the criminal defamation laws in Italy, believing that “the reform of the criminal defamation provisions in Italy is long overdue.” This is due to the fact that Article 595 of the 1930 Penal Code of Italy was drawn up at a time when freedom of expression was not seen as a right. The original aim of all criminal defamation laws then was to make criticism against monarchs a criminal offence and to silence dissent. Today, defamation is considered a private matter between two individuals with few public consequences; therefore, any criminal law or regulation with the potential for imprisonment, is inappropriate.

In contrast to U.S., Italian courts protect the nation’s public figures, national organizations and institutions. They’re also not afraid to sentence journalists to prison. Italian courts believe statements that are overly critical about public figures can be viewed as defamatory because they have the potential to undermine public confidence. By way of illustration, the Italian Court have indicted Amanda Knox’s parents for defamation for alleging in a 2008 newspaper interview that Italian police abused Amanda and was allegedly subjected to physical and verbal abuse during a police interrogation in 2007

It makes you wonder, the extent to which the existence and enforcement of these laws, has retarded constructive dialogue within the country and ultimately effected the development of Italian culture. I think it has had impact.

 

[Numbers]

It makes you wonder, the extent to which the existence and enforcement of these laws, has retarded constructive dialogue within the country and ultimately effected the development of Italian culture. I think it has had impact.

Some other European countries also have criminal defamation laws. There may be an interaction between the dysfunctions of the judicial system and the laws against "calunnia" and defamation that negatively affects freedom of expression in Italy.

 

[stilicho]

Some other European countries also have criminal defamation laws. There may be an interaction between the dysfunctions of the judicial system and the laws against "calunnia" and defamation that negatively affects freedom of expression in Italy.

In this case, however, Sollecito and Gumbel are co-authors of Honor Bound and jointly responsible for its contents. Among the plentiful lies included in the "memoir" is a detailed account of an illegal plea deal meeting involving the PM and Sollecito's lawyers.

All Sollecito needs to do is to produce evidence of this meeting and the whole case against the pair vanishes.

You could do something constructive for the convicted murderer by urging him to publicly distance himself from the claims as both his father and at least one of his lawyers already has. Instead, you're nitpicking about the alleged unfairness of the law itself. Italy is hardly the only constituency where defamation carries steep penalties. Here in Canada we have similar laws affecting even established professional journalists such as Ezra Levant. There is also a reason that the other book, soon to be the subject of legal action, wasn't released in the UK as planned.

None of this should have to be explained there is a surfeit of self-proclaimed legal experts at the ISF to guide you. Ask one of them.

Regarding sources: they're all in the Italian media as the US media is peculiarly uninterested in anything regarding Meredith's murder apart from what they're fed by the influential PR campaign financed by the family of one of the killers.

 

[Bill Williams]

In this case, however, Sollecito and Gumbel are co-authors of Honor Bound and jointly responsible for its contents. Among the plentiful lies included in the "memoir" is a detailed account of an illegal plea deal meeting involving the PM and Sollecito's lawyers.

Why is Gumbel charged, when John Follain was not in his piece where Curt and Edda got charged?

Do you agree with Machiavelli that the crime was not premeditated? If not premeditated, how do you explain the transport of the knife, and what do you make of Knox/Sollecito switching off their phones.

Thanks.

 

[Diocletus]

In this case, however, Sollecito and Gumbel are co-authors of Honor Bound and jointly responsible for its contents. Among the plentiful lies included in the "memoir" is a detailed account of an illegal plea deal meeting involving the PM and Sollecito's lawyers.

All Sollecito needs to do is to produce evidence of this meeting and the whole case against the pair vanishes.

Well, that's going to be interesting, isn't it? Since Sollecito's lawyer was present at the meeting, presumably we will have some evidence of such a meeting. Assuming that we do, the next question will be: who said what.

 

[Diocletus]

Regarding sources: they're all in the Italian media as the US media is peculiarly uninterested in anything regarding Meredith's murder apart from what they're fed by the influential PR campaign financed by the family of one of the killers.

The actual fact of Meredith Kercher's murder is at this point, going on 8 years later, uninteresting. The interesting thing is the criminal process.

 

[Mr Fied]

The other was caught fleeing his own appeal in a hotel bordering Slovenia and has had his travel papers revoked.

Really? Or had he already returned to Italy?

 

[Bill Williams]

Regarding sources: they're all in the Italian media as the US media is peculiarly uninterested in anything regarding Meredith's murder apart from what they're fed by the influential PR campaign financed by the family of one of the killers.

The sad thing is that you believe this, and it is not just a "talking point" for you. Do you really believe that there's not at least one prominent journalist in the US who would love to expose this?

 

[Dougm]

Regarding sources: they're all in the Italian media as the US media is peculiarly uninterested in anything regarding Meredith's murder apart from what they're fed by the influential PR campaign financed by the family of one of the killers.

Does anyone with an IQ over 3 talk about this anymore? REALLY? A middle class family, divorced, with 4 kids between them, average people who have no experience with either PR or the Italian judicial system, finances a multi-million dollar PR campaign, somehow convincing thousands of people that their daughter is innocent? With many of the people who have become convinced being experienced law enforcement, forensic scientists, professors, etc.?

Oh, and somehow, this PR campaign, directed by the diabolical Accountant and Math teacher from Seattle, fools legions of experienced journalists into questioning the case! Amazing!!

Or could it be, maybe, just maybe, that the reason people all over the world, everywhere except in very limited echo chambers, see there is no evidence against Knox and Sollecito? Could it be that no PR campaign exists, not only because it is illogical for it to exist, but because it is not needed?

Everyone knows the answer to these questions. Well almost everyone.

 

[Diocletus]

Well, that's going to be interesting, isn't it? Since Sollecito's lawyer was present at the meeting, presumably we will have some evidence of such a meeting. Assuming that we do, the next question will be: who said what.

Well, I just looked at the section of HB concerning this "meeting", and there wasn't one. Basically, Sollecito's family engaged a lawyer who they thought had a route to Mignini and thought that they could get a meeting between Mignini and Bongiorno. But, Bongiorno objected, and that's about it.

This passage is not defamatory.

 

[Numbers]

In this case, however, Sollecito and Gumbel are co-authors of Honor Bound and jointly responsible for its contents. Among the plentiful lies included in the "memoir" is a detailed account of an illegal plea deal meeting involving the PM and Sollecito's lawyers.

All Sollecito needs to do is to produce evidence of this meeting and the whole case against the pair vanishes.

You could do something constructive for the convicted murderer by urging him to publicly distance himself from the claims as both his father and at least one of his lawyers already has. Instead, you're nitpicking about the alleged unfairness of the law itself. Italy is hardly the only constituency where defamation carries steep penalties. Here in Canada we have similar laws affecting even established professional journalists such as Ezra Levant. There is also a reason that the other book, soon to be the subject of legal action, wasn't released in the UK as planned.

None of this should have to be explained there is a surfeit of self-proclaimed legal experts at the ISF to guide you. Ask one of them.

Regarding sources: they're all in the Italian media as the US media is peculiarly uninterested in anything regarding Meredith's murder apart from what they're fed by the influential PR campaign financed by the family of one of the killers.

{Highlighting added to quote.}

It's because there are laws like that in other countries that I am thinking about forming a group called FOCUS, Friends of the Constitution of the United States, to celebrate not having such laws.

 

[Numbers]

Well, I just looked at the section of HB concerning this "meeting", and there wasn't one. Basically, Sollecito's family engaged a lawyer who they thought had a route to Mignini and thought that they could get a meeting between Mignini and Bongiorno. But, Bongiorno objected, and that's about it.

This passage is not defamatory.

Methinks that the few posts from this poster may have an accuracy deficit.

 

[Desert Fox]

Well, I just looked at the section of HB concerning this "meeting", and there wasn't one. Basically, Sollecito's family engaged a lawyer who they thought had a route to Mignini and thought that they could get a meeting between Mignini and Bongiorno. But, Bongiorno objected, and that's about it.

This passage is not defamatory.

Methinks that the few posts from this poster may have an accuracy deficit.

It is a judicial truth that Sollecito's lawyers tried to make an illegal plea deal with the prosecution. . . . .

 

[Dougm]

Well, I just looked at the section of HB concerning this "meeting", and there wasn't one. Basically, Sollecito's family engaged a lawyer who they thought had a route to Mignini and thought that they could get a meeting between Mignini and Bongiorno. But, Bongiorno objected, and that's about it.

This passage is not defamatory.

Although I don't have the book in front of me (thank you for looking it up), your report matches my memory. While there has been much made about Sollecito writing in his book about how a deal (to turn on Amanda) was offered to him, if I recall, what he said was not that Mignini or anyone else specifically offered anything to him directly. It was that a family member of his intimated he could arrange such a deal, via someone who knew someone, etc. The point was that he turned down the very idea of turning on Amanda (hence the book title, Honor Bound).

I don't recall anywhere in the book his saying that he actually spoke to anyone from the PM's office on this, he just believed it was true because his family was pressuring him to agree to change his story.

I don't see how any of that is defamatory either.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Regarding sources: they're all in the Italian media as the US media is peculiarly uninterested in anything regarding Meredith's murder apart from what they're fed by the influential PR campaign financed by the family of one of the killers.

stilicho,
Is it difficult for you to accept you were bamboozled by Mignini's over-the-top Amanda Knox smear campaign when this case first broke, given how ridiculous and stupid it was in hindsight? I know I would be embarrassed. I also know that if I were fooled that badly, and actually believed there was a sacrificial sex game ritual, I would question my own intelligence quite a bit.

Is this continued accusation of an omnipotent PR campaign by Amanda Knox and her family that (according to you, and a bunch of lunatics on TJMK and PMF) influences all of the top forensic scientists in the world who have come out in support of Knox and Sollecito, an instance of psychological projection? Anyone that isn't mentally handicapped in some way (no, seriously... I'm not saying that to be mean), should immediately see there was no PR campaign by Knox that could influence all of the scientists in the world and all the journalists in North America. The PR firm was hired to handle media inquiries. That's it. They cannot manipulate the laws of molecular genetics.

Is it difficult for you to accept that you were fooled so badly, so you project your inadequacies on the pro-innocence crowd? Accusing us of being fooled by some strange all-powerful PR campaign? The world must be a very confusing place for you, stilicho... I can understand how it may be scary and you may need to project this kind of thing onto others. Maybe it's time to let all this go and find something else to do with your time?

Good luck with everything and I wish you the best in whatever you choose to do with all your free time after all this is over. I'm sure there are other propaganda fake-wikis (maybe for 9/11 truthers or moon-landing deniers) you can contribute to.

 

[Samson]

stilicho,
Is it difficult for you to accept you were bamboozled by Mignini's over-the-top Amanda Knox smear campaign when this case first broke, given how ridiculous and stupid it was in hindsight? I know I would be embarrassed. I also know that if I were fooled that badly, and actually believed there was a sacrificial sex game ritual, I would question my own intelligence quite a bit.

Is this continued accusation of an omnipotent PR campaign by Amanda Knox and her family that (according to you, and a bunch of lunatics on TJMK and PMF) influences all of the top forensic scientists in the world who have come out in support of Knox and Sollecito, an instance of psychological projection? Anyone that isn't mentally handicapped in some way (no, seriously... I'm not saying that to be mean), should immediately see there was no PR campaign by Knox that could influence all of the scientists in the world and all the journalists in North America. The PR firm was hired to handle media inquiries. That's it. They cannot manipulate the laws of molecular genetics.

Is it difficult for you to accept that you were fooled so badly, so you project your inadequacies on the pro-innocence crowd? Accusing us of being fooled by some strange all-powerful PR campaign? The world must be a very confusing place for you, stilicho... I can understand how it may be scary and you may need to project this kind of thing onto others. Maybe it's time to let all this go and find something else to do with your time?

Good luck with everything and I wish you the best in whatever you choose to do with all your free time after all this is over. I'm sure there are other propaganda fake-wikis (maybe for 9/11 truthers or moon-landing deniers) you can contribute to.

Yes, it can not be said often enough that it is very difficult to manipulate scientists, engineers, and medical researchers. I am mystified by the ease with which the following people, whether named or anonymous have been manipulated.

Matteini, Micheli, Massei, Nencini, Crini, Chieffi, Dershowitz, Grace, Callan, Maresca, TomM, Wants Justice, Jar, Catnip, Popper, Machiavelli.

These legals and paralegals are fodder for manipulation, I find this the most interesting fact in the case, and it requires extensive analysis to determine how this can be so.
It represents a cavernous failure in the ways of the Western world.