Continuation Part 12: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[carbonjam72]

Italy and the UK, oppressive libel laws and reckless tabloids

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.

The UK also has very strong libel/slander laws, I think the UK standard is you have to be able to prove that what you say is actually true. Whereas in the US, a simple "I'm stupid and didn't know" is actually a defense (although I think the standard is different for libeling/slandering "public" as opposed to "private" citizens.

But the courts in the UK are also outrageously expensive, and the custom is that the "loser pays" the cost of the case. SO a wealthy person can afford to sue, and lose, while scaring the daylights out of a non-wealthy person. Or alternatively, trounce a non-wealthy person in court because they can only afford a crappo lawyer, in which case the wealthy person can be both abusive before hand, and ruinous after the fact, at least against the wee folk who dare to speak the truth and lack the resources to defend themselves.

I think in the UK, its a residual 'class thing', and in Italy it's a residual 'fascism thing'.

But what's fascinating is that Italy and The UK seem to have the strongest libel/slander laws. and yet they also have the most irresponsible and reckless tabloids that have so deformed their society using mass produced ridicule as a weapon of mass social destruction.

SO the fact that Italian courts are horrendous, doesn't seem to track in the UK. I think the common denominator is an utterly vicious and unmerciful press and media, based on credulous populations that adore the sleazy tripe in their gutter tabloids.

BUt in Italy the problem is compounded by a systemically broken justice system, a relatively poorly educated and gullible populace, and unscrupulous prosecutors like Mignini who know how to exploit the process from soup to nuts.

Yes the law and courts in Italy must change. But the fault lies not in their 'stars', but in themselves.

 

[carbonjam72]

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.

You stop that! You're shattering people's paranoid sadistic fantasies!

 

[Diocletus]

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.

Spoken like a true JLOL, Herbert-reading Knifeboy Amandafan.

 

[carbonjam72]

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.

I sort of remember this from 'Honor Bound' as being rather subtly intimated, but not spoken in so many words. And also something about when Bongiourno found out she thought she might have had to quit the case over it.

But ultimately just suggesting that Mignini 'the Incorruptible' would even consider such an idea is itself a vicious slander that must be avenged!

(Robes Pierre I believe also referred to himself as 'the incorruptible', however I refuse to googl-ize this fact as it takes all the fun out of spontaneous trivia-spoutery)

Slander is in the eye of the beholder. And if you object to Mignini's satanic sect fantasy, this only proves you're a member of it trying to deflect his investigation! Now, send in the clowns!!

 

[Kaosium]

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?

It's even more telling that the journalists who did give them the time of day, like Nina Burleigh who met with both Peg Ganong and Peter Quenell, realized they were not only wrong about the case but kinda creepy besides. Here's her Time magazine article on them.

 

[Diocletus]

I sort of remember this from 'Honor Bound' as being rather subtly intimated, but not spoken in so many words. And also something about when Bongiourno found out she thought she might have had to quit the case over it.

But ultimately just suggesting that Mignini 'the Incorruptible' would even consider such an idea is itself a vicious slander that must be avenged!

(Robes Pierre I believe also referred to himself as 'the incorruptible', however I refuse to googl-ize this fact as it takes all the fun out of spontaneous trivia-spoutery)

Slander is in the eye of the beholder. And if you object to Mignini's satanic sect fantasy, this only proves you're a member of it trying to deflect his investigation! Now, send in the clowns!!

My take on it is that it was cleverly written and then reviewed to avoid giving rise to a defamation claim. It attributes bad intentions to Sollecito's own family, and suggests that an unnamed friend of Mignini's tried to play fixer. That person will be identified, and will either deny that he spoke with Mignini or deny that he was in contact with the Sollecitos. If he denied speaking with Mignini, then he will look like a shyster. If he denies speaking with the Sollecitos, then he will probably come out looking like a liar (I'm sure there are phone records/billing records).

So, there you have it: this story tells us that Mignini's consorts with either liars or shysters. And, to think, we never would have known if Mignini hadn't filed his defamation claim. Thanks, Mig!

 

[LondonJohn]

It's even more telling that the journalists who did give them the time of day, like Nina Burleigh who met with both Peg Ganong and Peter Quenell, realized they were not only wrong about the case but kinda creepy besides. Here's her Time magazine article on them.

She gains the honour of being deliberately misnamed "Ninny" Burleigh by the morons. hur hur hur hur

Just as Knox herself is "hilariously" referred to by some idiots as "Konx". hur hur hur hur hur

 

[Kaosium]

ECHR Judgments Relevant to the Amanda Knox / Raffaele Sollecito Case

http://wrongfulconvictionnews.com/e...t-to-the-amanda-knox-raffaele-sollecito-case/

The above article may be of interest.

Wow. Is that ever impressive work! I am in awe.

 

[Kaosium]

She gains the honour of being deliberately misnamed "Ninny" Burleigh by the morons. hur hur hur hur

Just as Knox herself is "hilariously" referred to by some idiots as "Konx". hur hur hur hur hur

Heh, her experiences in that article mirror yours to an extent, don't they? Initially assuming guilt but realizing in short order what a mess the case was and how irrational the denizens of PMF/TJMK were. Like Burleigh they branded you part of the 'PR campaign' and for the longest time maintained you were some PR hack from Texas.

I hope bringing that up doesn't embarrass you, it ought to embarrass them. Your posts at PMF and early in this thread are indicative of superior critical thinking skills and reading that whole exchange when on vacation the summer of '10 was quite instructive regarding just how nutty as a fruitcake your contemners were.

 

[anglolawyer]

Heh, her experiences in that article mirror yours to an extent, don't they? Initially assuming guilt but realizing in short order what a mess the case was and how irrational the denizens of PMF/TJMK were. Like Burleigh they branded you part of the 'PR campaign' and for the longest time maintained you were some PR hack from Texas.

I hope bringing that up doesn't embarrass you, it ought to embarrass them. Your posts at PMF and early in this thread are indicative of superior critical thinking skills and reading that whole exchange when on vacation the summer of '10 was quite instructive regarding just how nutty as a fruitcake your contemners were.

You and LJ are the gold standard of reasonableness as far as I'm concerned. Not the only ones by any means but I don't want to embarrass too many here.

 

[Kaosium]

You and LJ are the gold standard of reasonableness as far as I'm concerned. Not the only ones by any means but I don't want to embarrass too many here.

Thank you, Anglo. Were there a board to oversee convictions to determine if they were 'safe' or not I'd nominate you.

 

[anglolawyer]

Thank you, Anglo. Were there a board to oversee convictions to determine if they were 'safe' or not I'd nominate you.

Sweet! I'd like that job! . Thanks.

 

[carbonjam72]

My take on it is that it was cleverly written and then reviewed to avoid giving rise to a defamation claim. It attributes bad intentions to Sollecito's own family, and suggests that an unnamed friend of Mignini's tried to play fixer. That person will be identified, and will either deny that he spoke with Mignini or deny that he was in contact with the Sollecitos. If he denied speaking with Mignini, then he will look like a shyster. If he denies speaking with the Sollecitos, then he will probably come out looking like a liar (I'm sure there are phone records/billing records). So, there you have it: this story tells us that Mignini's consorts with either liars or shysters. And, to think, we never would have known if Mignini hadn't filed his defamation claim. Thanks, Mig!

Unless it was done over lunch, in which case I hope the Sollecitos paid by credit card, and had them surreptitiously photo'd.

But I don't think the Sollecitos were that well thought out about it, I think it was the ninny aunts out freewheeling. (just a guess).

I do agree though that Mig may have finally sown the seeds of his own undoing with this defamation case. Now his precious "honor", "face" and "career" really are on the line. It's really where the spotlight ought to have been from the beginning, on that phony lying monster.

 

[Bill Williams]

You and LJ are the gold standard of reasonableness as far as I'm concerned. Not the only ones by any means but I don't want to embarrass too many here.

I agree. And Numbers and Kauffer are catching up. The loons at the hate sites have no equivalent to the Fab Four.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

some thoughts on the collection technique in the bathroom

So to ask it again, how do we know the blood on the tap belongs to Amanda? How do we know any DNA from that sample isn't from the wider area around the blood spot and due to the wide area collection method of using the same swab in multiple spots?

By the way, is that collection method designed to produce an "incriminating" result, but mixing background DNA in with visible blood spots?

carbonjam72,

When I view exactly how the spot on the faucet was collected, I would say that it does not look that badly done (about 1:25). As long as blood is relatively fresh, the DNA should properly individualize the blood. When blood is very old, all bets are off, as in the Mixer case.

With respect to collection technique immediately after the faucet, that is another matter (1:42). It looks as if the technician is collecting two separate areas, which increases the chances of mixing DNA. The same thing happens around 3:40. It belies Stefanoni's claim that they collected a continuous trace (I think that this is summarized in Massei, but I don't have a page number). I would also point out that even Colonel Garofano wasn't too thrilled about collecting around the drain plug. The technician even handled it in his/her gloved hand. Around the 1:00 mark the technician appears to use both sides of the swab. If they had not been changing gloves, then the technician could be sampling what is on his/her glove as well as what is on the switch.

 

[js202]

I do agree though that Mig may have finally sown the seeds of his own undoing with this defamation case. Now his precious "honor", "face" and "career" really are on the line. It's really where the spotlight ought to have been from the beginning, on that phony lying monster.

Well, from your "lips" to God's ears. However, one can't forget the way the Florence court very recently found a way to let the same monster off scott free on his corruption charges.

7+ years has made me deeply cynical about all of this. My prediction is that the March court will confirm the guilty verdicts against AK & RS, yet again be gentle with and supportive of Meisterberger Mignini, and it will be left for the adults in Strasbourg to sort it all out.

 

[anglolawyer]

I agree. And Numbers and Kauffer are catching up. The loons at the hate sites have no equivalent to the Fab Four.

Like I said, there are plenty I don't want to embarrass but I have learned a lot on this series of threads. There are anc have been some very good people here.

 

[Bill Williams]

Like I said, there are plenty I don't want to embarrass but I have learned a lot on this series of threads. There are anc have been some very good people here.

Stilicho will be asking at the hate sites why the pro-guilt lobby can't match the lucrative offer David Marriott made to LJ, Kaosium, Numbers and Kauffer in recruiting them to pull the wool over the American public.

Obviously these four can be bought. Or else why would they say the things they do about the obviously guilty? I mean, what about, "All the other evidence"? I've not seen any of them address that!

 

[carbonjam72]

When I view exactly how the spot on the faucet was collected, I would say that it does not look that badly done (about 1:25). As long as blood is relatively fresh, the DNA should properly individualize the blood. When blood is very old, all bets are off, as in the Mixer case.

With respect to collection technique immediately after the faucet, that is another matter (1:42). It looks as if the technician is collecting two separate areas, which increases the chances of mixing DNA. The same thing happens around 3:40. It belies Stefanoni's claim that they collected a continuous trace (I think that this is summarized in Massei, but I don't have a page number). I would also point out that even Colonel Garofano wasn't too thrilled about collecting around the drain plug. The technician even handled it in his/her gloved hand. Around the 1:00 mark the technician appears to use both sides of the swab. If they had not been changing gloves, then the technician could be sampling what is on his/her glove as well as what is on the switch.

Thanks for explaining this in a bit more detail, and I apologize for not being better informed, but I keep seeing posts that claim a blood typing was never done for the blood on the faucet? Is this true? The implied issue is whether the blood on the faucet was ever definitively matched to Amanda?

(I think you answered this point that DNA was sufficient to match without blood typing being necessary, although wouldn't it be interesting if the blood typing came back negative for Amanda, but DNA positive for Amanda).

And, even if no blood typing were done, is that also irrelevant, since (or rather if) the DNA result came back with sufficient clarity that it was affirmatively Amanda? (in other words, did the DNA result from the faucet come back as Amanda?).

And did the DNA result from the faucet also come back with Meredith (or anyone else), or just Amanda?

It's a pretty crazy piece of bad luck to happen to be bleeding, even a drop, on the night your room-mate was brutally murdered in a quaint hill town in Italy.

I can't help but wonder if my confirmation bias is precluding me from seeing why guilters get so upset, so fast, over seemingly irrelevant details. But this one bugged me. However, hearing that there was a spot of blood on Amanda's pillow seems to go a long way towards dispelling any other conclusions, in combo with the fact that there were no visible wounds after a thorough check by police when they were arrested.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

ear piercings

carbonjam72,

Yes, the DNA is a far better way to individualize blood than a simple blood typing. I don't know whether or not blood typing was done. I cannot recall exactly when Amanda's ear was bleeding, and I have searched around for the date on which they were pierced, and I am not sure that everyone agrees on this point. The idea that just because someone said that the bathroom was clean means that there could not have been a spot on the faucet is not reasonable. I don't have a link to the photo itself.