Continuation Part 12: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

Guilters tend to equate mass with quality. 10,000 pages = guilty!

G = m * q^2?

 

[Planigale]

Why are Italian forensic techs special snowflakes? I have a feeling that if Annie Dookhan was Italian, you would be making excuses for her as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Dookhan

Edit: The only way a legal system fixes its mistakes is if the people put the system to the fire and make them fix the problems. Making excuses does not solve any problems.

Yes. If this had happened in the UK people would be campaigning for a reform of the forensic services. People have quoted here an inquiry over the forensic handling of material related to bombs, a more politically sensitive area. Now I am not claiming this happens quickly. There is a well known Scottish case involving the wrongful sacking of a police officer accused of mishandling a crime scene and leaving her fingerprints at the scene that took years to correct (Rolfe will no the details I am sure), but these things are pursued, there is an assumption that things can be improved maybe only a bit, but it is worth doing. The problem it seems here is the failure to realise that this may represent a more systemic problem that needs fixing. (Actually I suspect this may have been realised, systems may have been improved, but it would represent a loss of face to admit this).

 

[Numbers]

Some positive words about Italy...they're not as bad as before (for number of cases pending at the ECHR):

Press conference
President Dean Spielmann
Strasbourg, 29 January 2015

....

....
In September 2014 more than 17,000 cases were pending against Italy; by the end of the year that figure had been reduced to 10,000. I would like to thank the Italian authorities for their efforts,especially as regards the follow-up to the Torregiani judgment and all aspects
of the length-of-proceedings cases. I am pleased to say that Italy seems to be
on the right track as regards its cases before the Court.
....

Somewhere in those 10,000 applications is the one from Amanda Knox, regarding the violation of her rights under the European Convention by the State of Italy for convicting her of calunnia solely based on statements she made under a coercive interrogation by police without the presence of counsel November 5/6, 2007, and which she began to retract in a written statement (written in police custody without the aid of counsel) on November 6, 2007 followed by a second statement November 7, 2007 (also written in police custody without the aid of counsel).

Conviction for a crime based upon statements made by a subject under interrogation without counsel is a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights Article 6.3c (right to counsel) with Article 6.1 (right to a fair trial), according to ECHR case-law (Salduz v. Turkey and many other cases).

 

[Rolfe]

Yes. If this had happened in the UK people would be campaigning for a reform of the forensic services. People have quoted here an inquiry over the forensic handling of material related to bombs, a more politically sensitive area. Now I am not claiming this happens quickly. There is a well known Scottish case involving the wrongful sacking of a police officer accused of mishandling a crime scene and leaving her fingerprints at the scene that took years to correct (Rolfe will no the details I am sure), but these things are pursued, there is an assumption that things can be improved maybe only a bit, but it is worth doing. The problem it seems here is the failure to realise that this may represent a more systemic problem that needs fixing. (Actually I suspect this may have been realised, systems may have been improved, but it would represent a loss of face to admit this).

It's certainly not as bad here as it is in Italy, to put it into perspective, but it's not as rosy as that post suggests. As I said, the scientists at RARDE weren't censured for what they did, and they lived to rig a few more wrongful convictions. Including the Hyde Park bombing.

The little difficulty with the complete notebooks revealing cherrypicking and bias was fixed, not by eliminating cherrypicking and bias, but by switching to using loose-leaf sheets so that pages could be removed and interpolated at will. They were also playing a dodgy game with 35 mm photographic negatives.

Shirley McKie was paid £700,000 to shut up and go away, rather than have her case come to court and allow full scrutiny of what had happened with these misidentified fingerprints.

I think they have tightened things up in the SCRO since then, but it's all very murky and they're more interested in saving face than in ensuring transparency and public confidence.

 

[Numbers]

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/news.aspx#news

A Record - 125 Exonerations in 2014
January 27, 2015

In 2014, for the first time in the United States, there were more than 100 exonerations in a single year—125 that are known to date, 34 more than the previous record of 91 exonerations in 2013. A major reason for the record number of exonerations is the impact of Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs), units within prosecutors’ offices that work to identify and remedy false convictions in cases they originally prosecuted. The National Registry of Exonerations’ 2014 Report, based on the 1,535 exonerations known as of January 20, 2015, also discusses trends such as the increase in exonerations in cases without biological evidence or with no actual perpetrator; cases with comparatively light sentences; and judgments based on guilty pleas.

Currently 1,537 Exonerations (since 1989)

 

[Samson]

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/news.aspx#news

A Record - 125 Exonerations in 2014
January 27, 2015

In 2014, for the first time in the United States, there were more than 100 exonerations in a single year—125 that are known to date, 34 more than the previous record of 91 exonerations in 2013. A major reason for the record number of exonerations is the impact of Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs), units within prosecutors’ offices that work to identify and remedy false convictions in cases they originally prosecuted. The National Registry of Exonerations’ 2014 Report, based on the 1,535 exonerations known as of January 20, 2015, also discusses trends such as the increase in exonerations in cases without biological evidence or with no actual perpetrator; cases with comparatively light sentences; and judgments based on guilty pleas.

Currently 1,537 Exonerations (since 1989)

This is quite remarkable. There can be no exoneration without a wrongful conviction.
I expect these per capita statistics to be about right for New Zealand this year, with Teina Pora certain to be retried and found innocent.

 

[Desert Fox]

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/news.aspx#news

A Record - 125 Exonerations in 2014
January 27, 2015

In 2014, for the first time in the United States, there were more than 100 exonerations in a single year—125 that are known to date, 34 more than the previous record of 91 exonerations in 2013. A major reason for the record number of exonerations is the impact of Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs), units within prosecutors’ offices that work to identify and remedy false convictions in cases they originally prosecuted. The National Registry of Exonerations’ 2014 Report, based on the 1,535 exonerations known as of January 20, 2015, also discusses trends such as the increase in exonerations in cases without biological evidence or with no actual perpetrator; cases with comparatively light sentences; and judgments based on guilty pleas.

Currently 1,537 Exonerations (since 1989)

One of the things about the posters here who argue for the innocence of Amanda and Raff, we do not argue that the American, British, etc legal system is perfect. Instead, we argue that we want our legal system fixed. The pro guilt side seem to puts their head in the sand and argue that their system has no problems.

 

[Rolfe]

But the majority of the pro-guilt posters aren't Italian as far as I can see, so that doesn't entirely follow.

 

[Desert Fox]

But the majority of the pro-guilt posters aren't Italian as far as I can see, so that doesn't entirely follow.

I thought the majority here are Italian?
For some others I have argued with on other boards, it seem a hatred of America.

 

[Kauffer]

Concerning Kauffer's quote from Battistelli, is that from court testimony, or from his contemporaneous statements taken at that time? As DANO points out, B's later testimony could well be shaded by a shared story, and well rehearsed by Mignini in preparation for trial.

It was from testimony - Feb 6th 2009.

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/kercher-crime-scene-break-in/

Lots of people observed that there was nothing obviously stolen - Ms Knox, the postales, Romanelli, Altieri and of course, Mr Sollecito. Later, of course, it would be Mr Sollecito's carabinieri phone calls where he states that nothing was stolen that was taken to be suspicious. It was all nonsense of course because his was the same observation as the others, including police officers!

My reading of the the evidence is that this is where the meme started - that a burglary without theft points towards a staging. But of course, it was not that. It was an attempted burglary, which Ms Kercher interrupted (or so most of us argue) and so the lack of theft is entirely unsurprising. But when Mr Sollecito placed his calls, the body had not been discovered.

 

[Machiavelli]

Sop you should be able to point for point refute every claim on the list then?

In fact I already did. But the refutation basically consists in just noting the complete lack of evidence for the points. Statements like "the plate number is 365bis" are not points. Assertions like "Stefanoni suppressed results" are no evidence to refute.
And those who assert they have "evidence" of wrongdoings they should present that to the police or to a judge.

 

[Kauffer]

Laboratory Contamination: Draft Guidance

The UK's Forensic Science Regulator has opened a period of consultation on its draft guidance for the control and avoidance of contamination in laboratory activities involving DNA evidence.

Perhaps the scientists here (and others) would be interested to read the draft guidance, which can be accessed via the announcement here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/lab-contamination-draft-guidance

Or directly here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...52/208_FSR_lab_contamination_Consultation.pdf

 

[anglolawyer]

In fact I already did. But the refutation basically consists in just noting the complete lack of evidence for the points. Statements like "the plate number is 365bis" are not points. Assertions like "Stefanoni suppressed results" are no evidence to refute.
And those who assert they have "evidence" of wrongdoings they should present that to the police or to a judge.

You would be more credible if you didn't try to defend everythinb but, since you choose to do so, can you explain whether the suggestion Stefanone destroyed the clasp as evidence by storing it incorrectly is just a propagandist lie concocted by the malicious Hellman and Vechiotti? Or is there another explanation. Please remember when replying that someone using your handle has already gloated here about the law that requires destruction of forensic material.

 

[Bill Williams]

In fact I already did. But the refutation basically consists in just noting the complete lack of evidence for the points. Statements like "the plate number is 365bis" are not points. Assertions like "Stefanoni suppressed results" are no evidence to refute.
And those who assert they have "evidence" of wrongdoings they should present that to the police or to a judge.

As a dedicated follower of your posts, I cannot find your refutations. Please point to them.

 

[carbonjam72]

It was from testimony - Feb 6th 2009.

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/kercher-crime-scene-break-in/

Lots of people observed that there was nothing obviously stolen - Ms Knox, the postales, Romanelli, Altieri and of course, Mr Sollecito. Later, of course, it would be Mr Sollecito's carabinieri phone calls where he states that nothing was stolen that was taken to be suspicious. It was all nonsense of course because his was the same observation as the others, including police officers!

My reading of the the evidence is that this is where the meme started - that a burglary without theft points towards a staging. But of course, it was not that. It was an attempted burglary, which Ms Kercher interrupted (or so most of us argue) and so the lack of theft is entirely unsurprising. But when Mr Sollecito placed his calls, the body had not been discovered.

I think the larger point I was trying to make is not that "the meme started with Bat", isn't a workable theory. Especially if you rely on the story told by Mignini and prosecution witnesses. That is THEIR story, I agree.

The point I tried to make is that to be thorough, you also have to specifically disregard all the other indications that the accusation of a "staged break-in" served Mignini and Giobbi's personal agendas.

The theory you're suggesting is that the "staging" meme was innocently transferred to the larger murder investigation. The theory I'm suggesting is that such transference, if it occurred, wasn't innocent error.

SO I guess that's where we seem to differ.

The question I would ask, are about the other questions I raised in my comment you partially quoted but omitted ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10451759#post10451759 ) with respect to police familiarity with Guede, and the need and disposition of Mignini and Giobbi to "discern" satanic conspiracies and "serious criminals".

Do you feel this line of inquiry is immaterial? Because yours and others assessment thus far in this regard to the 'staging' meme, seems to overlook this aspect in entirety.

I think Mignini decided the break-in would be claimed to be staged before he arrived at the crime scene.

 

[Dan O.]

And those who assert they have "evidence" of wrongdoings they should present that to the police or to a judge.

And why should we be running off to Italy to tell the police or a judge that they have a problem? If they were concerned about such things they would come to us or just read this thread for themselves. They are going to get the message eventually when ECHR rules against them. You could help them get their act straight sooner if you wern't part of the problem.

 

[Rolfe]

Not intended as a derail, but I have experience in bringing evidence of investigator and prosecutorial wrongdoing to the attention of the police. One should not assume that this is simple or straightforward, or indeed that the very police force you are accusing of wrongdoing is going to welcome your allegations with open arms - or an open mind.

 

[Numbers]

I think the larger point I was trying to make is not that "the meme started with Bat", isn't a workable theory. Especially if you rely on the story told by Mignini and prosecution witnesses. That is THEIR story, I agree.

The point I tried to make is that to be thorough, you also have to specifically disregard all the other indications that the accusation of a "staged break-in" served Mignini and Giobbi's personal agendas.

The theory you're suggesting is that the "staging" meme was innocently transferred to the larger murder investigation. The theory I'm suggesting is that such transference, if it occurred, wasn't innocent error.

SO I guess that's where we seem to differ.

The question I would ask, are about the other questions I raised in my comment you partially quoted but omitted ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10451759#post10451759 ) with respect to police familiarity with Guede, and the need and disposition of Mignini and Giobbi to "discern" satanic conspiracies and "serious criminals".

Do you feel this line of inquiry is immaterial? Because yours and others assessment thus far in this regard to the 'staging' meme, seems to overlook this aspect in entirety.

I think Mignini decided the break-in would be claimed to be staged before he arrived at the crime scene.

These issues are interesting points to debate. Coming to a conclusion about what was "innocent error" and what was "intentional framing" in the days prior to the Nov. 5/6 interrogation may be difficult due to lack of direct evidence. The Nov. 5/6 interrogation without counsel for the subjects, when the initial subject, Raffaele Sollecito was invited to the police station late in the evening (and actually came later, because of a desire to finish dinner) is absolutely evidence of intended misconduct, IMO. Police don't interview non-suspects late at night for a crime that was discovered days before.

There was no legitimate, reasonable explanation for Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to be suspects, and the police needed to assume that the break-in was staged to justify the frame-up. The police carefully did not investigate the physical characteristics of the break-in, so as to maintain the pretense that it was a staging. The initial observation that nothing was missing, or almost nothing (Meredith's cell phones and money were taken), may have been absorbed non-innocently into the frame-up.

 

[Rolfe]

I wonder just how possible it is to determine when this sort of thing is "merely" tunnel vision and confirmation bias, and when it crosses the line into conscious framing of someone the investigator knows or suspects to be innocent. I've read some very heartening stories of occasions when investigators themselves have realised they're on the wrong track and re-evaluated what they were doing, but these do seem to be rather in the minority.

There's something in the human psyche that doesn't like to relinquish a preconceived opinion, and you only have to look in numerous threads around the forum to see the twisting and turning that goes on when people are presented with evidence that contradicts their beliefs. Even when people have been comprehensively exonerated in court you still see investigators insisting they were guilty all along. I don't think they're misrepresenting their own opinions there.

I was discussing another case with an acquaintance - actually I think it was the Shirley McKie fingerprint error someone else mentioned above. My acquaintance said, but surely if they're looking at the girl and they can see what they're doing to her and her life, how can they go on behaving like that?

I immediately had a vision of Amanda Knox when Hellmann acquitted her of murder. It was so obvious just how much she had been affected by it all. I said, look at that farce going on in Perugia at the moment. If a legal system can do that to two students, anything can happen.

My acquaintance wasn't familiar with the case and asked me if I thought Knox was indeed innocent. I gave him the quick-and-dirty overview (at which point he asked me how I knew all that and I cited this thread), and he just shook his head.

I wish lie detectors and truth drugs really existed so we could find out if people like Stefanoni and Mignini and the rest of them honestly believe Amanda and Raffaele murdered Meredith. I really don't know what answers we'd get.

 

[Bill Williams]

And those who assert they have "evidence" of wrongdoings they should present that to the police or to a judge.

And why should we be running off to Italy to tell the police or a judge that they have a problem? If they were concerned about such things they would come to us or just read this thread for themselves. They are going to get the message eventually when ECHR rules against them. You could help them get their act straight sooner if you wern't part of the problem.

Machiavelli should familiarize himself with a Hobson's Choice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice

As soon as someone did as Machiavelli advised, they'd be charged with defamation. The police and PMs control the charge process. This case has proven that judges will sometimes side with the prosecutor simplyon their say so.

Machiavelli has admitted this. He has said that at trial, the court assumes that what police and PMs theorize, has some reason behind it - even with no evidence offered.

The burden of proof, in effect, is then reversed.

It would simply do no good in this case to bring evidence of Stefanoni's wrongdoings to an Italian court. Massei and Necini's courts are evidence of that! Judge Massei had most of the evidence of Stefanoni's unprofessionalism in front of him - he saw both those pictures upthread.

He sided with Stefanoni anyway, simply on her say-so.