Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Rolfe]

Rolfe, I see you have posted 38,000 comments on this board. I'm speechless!

Over a period of more than eleven years, bear in mind. Others have posted even more than I have.

 

[Rolfe]

If I had evidence that Stefanoni committed serious crimes I would submit a 'denouncement' to either the Carabinieri, the Police or the Procura in Rome.
That may be done directly by the witness or through a lawyer.
The denouncement contains the testimony and may include evidence (documents etc.). It can be an oral testimony or it can be written.
What's important is that it needs to be truthful, that means in good faith, or the witness faces a calunnia charge.

I don't know if this can be done from the US territory at the Italian embassy. But they may provide useful addresses.

There is also a special channel for "anonimous denouncements" at the Anti-Corruption Authority.

Good luck with that, anyone who tries it. I began this process in Scotland in September 2012. I'm sitting here right now writing yet another document to assist the police inquiry that is still going on in relation to these "allegations of criminality" as we term it.

You have to be very committed, very sure of your ground, and very persistent. You also have to have a good lawyer at your back. But it can be done.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

two essays on noble cause corruption

An essay on noble cause corruption with a philosophical emphasis. Starting on page 20 this essay deals with noble cause corruption.

 

[Rolfe]

Thanks, I'll try to get round to reading these!

 

[platonov]

Nobody has posted to this thread for over five hours. Are you all dead or something?

No, it’s because nothing of note has happened in cartwheel world recently.
In the real world however RS appeared on Italian TV where he spoke [unambiguously ]about AK’s whereabouts on the night of/morning after the murder.
As the tenuous link between these 2 worlds has been completely severed for many months now there is nothing to talk about.

Actually that’s not quite true. We resolved who looked better in women’s clothing; Mach or I. It appears Mach has conceded the point.

 

[Desert Fox]

No, it’s because nothing of note has happened in cartwheel world recently.
In the real world however RS appeared on Italian TV where he spoke [unambiguously ]about AK’s whereabouts on the night of/morning after the murder.
As the tenuous link between these 2 worlds has been completely severed for many months now there is nothing to talk about.

Actually that’s not quite true. We resolved who looked better in women’s clothing; Mach or I. It appears Mach has conceded the point.

Perhaps you could address Sept79 17+ list a few posts above yours

 

[lonepinealex]

platonov, do you believe Raffaele to be guilty or innocent?

 

[Bill Williams]

No, it’s because nothing of note has happened in cartwheel world recently.
In the real world however RS appeared on Italian TV where he spoke [unambiguously ]about AK’s whereabouts on the night of/morning after the murder.As the tenuous link between these 2 worlds has been completely severed for many months now there is nothing to talk about.

Actually that’s not quite true. We resolved who looked better in women’s clothing; Mach or I. It appears Mach has conceded the point.

One can only repeat lonepinealex's question - do you believe Raffaele is innocent of this murder?

Also maybe add one more. In what way does Raffaele's comments on Porta a Porta meaningfully diverge from his Appeals' document, or from what he wrote in Honor Bound?

Do you believe him when he says that Amanda Knox is 100% innocent?

 

[Bill Williams]

Good luck with that, anyone who tries it. I began this process in Scotland in September 2012. I'm sitting here right now writing yet another document to assist the police inquiry that is still going on in relation to these "allegations of criminality" as we term it.

You have to be very committed, very sure of your ground, and very persistent. You also have to have a good lawyer at your back. But it can be done.

You also have to have an absolutely air-tight case, perhaps with things like video of any relevant incident. You also have to have limitless money.

In Italy, the police/prosecution authorities are considered trustworthy in all cases, raising the bar further on the standard of proof one needs. And at the end of the day if the thing is thrown out on the most minor of technicalities, the accuser is then open to defamation and/or calunnia.

I doubt that Machiavelli would actually do it.

 

[Machiavelli]

How much crime does Stefanoni get to commit before it reaches a threshold of being "serious"?

Does suppressing DNA data and hiding profiles count?

This really would make a good exercise. If the research that's been done showing contamination in stef's results and so on are accurate, wouldn't that constitute a basis for a compliant.

Seriously though, for anyone considering this, I would take advantage of Mach's suggestion to do so anonymously.

On the other hand, Stafanoni was caught committing perjury on the witness stand, and the courts did nothing about it. So who are we kidding here?

Serious crime means serious charges, which in jurisprudence means charges that have a mandatory investigation by the State if evidence is presented (called procedibili d'ufficio).

A hypothetical suppression of data would be a charge of either judicial fraud or false in expert reporting, in the event that those data are relevant (you need evidence that they are relevant in order to find someone guilty of the charge).

Planting false DNA evidence, or presenting a false incriminating testimony would constitute a charge of calunnia.

Those are serious charges.

It is obviously not true that Stefanoni committed perjury, or even less that she was "caught" by anyone doing so.

Sending an anonymous denouncement with a list of claims would sort little effect, in my opinion, as for the purpose of the pro-Knoxes. Because the claims would appear obviously unfounded and they would be tossed, or investigated and then tossed secretly, and no one would know about it.
My understanding of the pro-Knox agenda makes me thing that a denouncement could make sense only if it brings back some response, some judicial act at least on a first step, either stating that there is evidence to investigate, or that there is no ground for opening an investigation. In the event there is a reason t investigate these claims, I suppose public interest would be to know if there is evidence that a crime was committed or not.

Based on my assessment of the "evidence" claimed by the pro-Knoxes I say there could be hardly a "public" response following an anonymous denouncement.

 

[Machiavelli]

You also have to have an absolutely air-tight case, perhaps with things like video of any relevant incident. You also have to have limitless money.

In Italy, the police/prosecution authorities are considered trustworthy in all cases, raising the bar further on the standard of proof one needs. And at the end of the day if the thing is thrown out on the most minor of technicalities, the accuser is then open to defamation and/or calunnia.

I doubt that Machiavelli would actually do it.

I would certainly do it, but not based on the evidence that you have against Stefanoni.

I would do that against Conti and Vecchiotti. And in fact, someone does that (and not anonimously).

 

[Rolfe]

You also have to have an absolutely air-tight case, perhaps with things like video of any relevant incident. You also have to have limitless money.

Nope, not here. Having succeeded in putting forward a case which is credible, and can't be easily dismissed by a senior copper in the six months before his retirement (they tried that first), our cops have allocated a major investigation team to the allegations, and they have taken on the responsibility (with our help) of carrying out the inquiries needed to see if there is indeed a case strong enough to take to court. It's even got a name. Operation Sandwood.

It's also not costing us a penny. Apart from occasional travel and printer cartidge type expenses. I guess it's as well I pay my taxes.

In Italy, the police/prosecution authorities are considered trustworthy in all cases, raising the bar further on the standard of proof one needs. And at the end of the day if the thing is thrown out on the most minor of technicalities, the accuser is then open to defamation and/or calunnia.

I doubt that Machiavelli would actually do it.

Well yes, Italy is a whole other can of worms. We may be bad, but realising how much worse it is in Italy gives me some comfort.

 

[Machiavelli]

One can only repeat lonepinealex's question - do you believe Raffaele is innocent of this murder?

Also maybe add one more. In what way does Raffaele's comments on Porta a Porta meaningfully diverge from his Appeals' document, or from what he wrote in Honor Bound?

Do you believe him when he says that Amanda Knox is 100% innocent?

Sollecito doesn't say "Amanda is 100% innocent".

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)

Well yes, Italy is a whole other can of worms. We may be bad, but realising how much worse it is in Italy gives me some comfort.

Actully we did wage legal action agaisnt police officers in some recent cases, and I have also helped collecting evidence in a couple of famous ones.

But I see no evidence against Patrizia Stefanoni, neithr agaisnt Perugian prosecutors. I think their work was honest and competent.

 

[lonepinealex]

Machiavelli - do you think Raffaele is innocent or guilty?

 

[Rolfe]

Actully we did wage legal action agaisnt police officers in some recent cases, and I have also helped collecting evidence in a couple of famous ones.

But I see no evidence against Patrizia Stefanoni, neithr agaisnt Perugian prosecutors. I think their work was honest and competent.

Patrizia Stefanoni would have been sacked for unacceptably low standards of sample handling in any lab I've ever worked in. The bra clasp thing is just astounding. My molecular technicians reject a sample for testing if someone opened the sample tube outside their controlled airspace.

But it's not Patrizia Stefanoni I have in my crosshairs at the moment, so I'll leave her to you.

 

[Bill Williams]

One can only repeat lonepinealex's question - do you believe Raffaele is innocent of this murder?

Also maybe add one more. In what way does Raffaele's comments on Porta a Porta meaningfully diverge from his Appeals' document, or from what he wrote in Honor Bound?

Do you believe him when he says that Amanda Knox is 100% innocent?

Sollecito doesn't say "Amanda is 100% innocent".

Machiavelli, please do not be absurd.

How about the other questions, though. In what way do Raffaele's responses in Porta a Porta differ in essence from Honor Bound?

Do you believe Raffaele is innocent of this murder? If not, why is he still claiming Amanda's innocence?

 

[Bill Williams]

Nope, not here. Having succeeded in putting forward a case which is credible, and can't be easily dismissed by a senior copper in the six months before his retirement (they tried that first), our cops have allocated a major investigation team to the allegations, and they have taken on the responsibility (with our help) of carrying out the inquiries needed to see if there is indeed a case strong enough to take to court. It's even got a name. Operation Sandwood.

It's also not costing us a penny. Apart from occasional travel and printer cartidge type expenses. I guess it's as well I pay my taxes.

You are fortunate. Here, if the case is high profile enough, and attracts a measure of public sympathy, those resources might be available.

If not, you'd better have a pile of money, up front. And you'd better be right, with little leeway for understandable errors or mistakes which might creep in along the way.

 

[Bill Williams]

I would certainly do it, but not based on the evidence that you have against Stefanoni.

I would do that against Conti and Vecchiotti. And in fact, someone does that (and not anonimously).

Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Machiavelli]

"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." Amnesty International on Italy in 2007.

Hard to think about a more dishonest fashion of posting comments.

You have been presented with a fact that you can't refute, that is: authorities cannot start any investigation on an allegation of beating or hitting, without a legal complaint by the victim.

The same happens in most jurisdictions.

That means: any allegation that the prosecution failed to pursue alleged duties of promptly and formally investigating the claim of hitting, is false.

And this has nothing to do with torture, service number plates or with the nature of accountability bodies, and you know that.

If you wanted to comment, all what you would have to do is to acknowledge that what I say is true, and the opposite claim is false.

You decide to avoid the point completely and you speak about torture, this is you MO. You know well you paste things with the purpose of diverting from the topic whenever you don't have any possible decent argument (something that happens rather often).