Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Strozzi]

Sounds like Mach has made the argument that Amanda's conviction for calunnia should be reversed.

I know Mach that is not your intent, but it is nonetheless the implication of your argument.

It will be interesting to see if the ECHR agrees with Mach's position. How great would that be?

I can see it now - ECHR reverses the calunnia conviction and Mach says "See, I told you she was innocent!"

 

[Diocletus]

In her mind that would have been a proposition to end a murder sentence with.

I see what you did there.

 

[Bill Williams]

Yes I think you are correct (except for the fact that it was a Nov. 9th 2007 hearing), I recall it as a Massei decision on a defence instance.

If Raffaele Sollecito demanded Nencini to re-admit the GIP hearing and to be interrogated himself, he would have obtained that, and based on that Nencini could have satisfied in practice the defence request of splitting the positions. By offering Nencini a different version, different from that of Amanda Knox, and be cross questioned on it, and if that version was credible or anyway contained significant element, by doing this factually Sollecito would have opened the door to a separation of the evidence sets and roles.

How did Rudy Guede get a separation without ever being cross examined?

 

[Diocletus]

No. Impossible. Autocalunnia means the witness is malicious, and able to understand and will.

This has to be the dumbest law I've ever heard of.

 

[Machiavelli]

Between the Monster of Florence case and this one, more than 40 people had 'investigations' started and/or charges filed on them at the behest of Mignini. In this case that included Amanda's parents and five members of Raffaele's family as well as two Telenorba journalists, Joe Cottonwood, Steve Shea, Frank Sfarzo, Giangavino Sulas and Umberto Brindani of Oggi as well as Fransesca Bene. Some of them are detailed here, others can be found here and some of the ones from the Monster of Florence case here.

Mignini is delusional.

To say that people must be afraid about retaliation from authorities when they speak in Italy is delusional. Thus is the land of wild and rabid dreams from which some Knox supporters should better depart, for the sake if the health, and have a look at the real world.

Kaosium you should be careful talking about things you don't have any clue about.

 

[Machiavelli]

How did Rudy Guede get a separation without ever being cross examined?

Why these dumb questions, after seven years?
Guede asked for a fast track trial. The others did not. And despite this his position was not separated.

 

[Machiavelli]

I can see it now - ECHR reverses the calunnia conviction and Mach says "See, I told you she was innocent!"

The ECHR cannot reverse convictions.

 

[Machiavelli]

Sounds like Mach has made the argument that Amanda's conviction for calunnia should be reversed.

I know Mach that is not your intent, but it is nonetheless the implication of your argument.

It will be interesting to see if the ECHR agrees with Mach's position. How great would that be?

Amanda's conviction is final. It cannot be reversed nor annulled.

 

[Desert Fox]

The ECHR cannot reverse convictions.

Amanda's conviction is final. It cannot be reversed nor annulled.

So you think Italy should pull out of the ECHR?
Very good, let every other country stop extraditing to Italy.

 

[carbonjam72]

Amanda's conviction is final. It cannot be reversed nor annulled.

Of course you're referring to the conviction for calunnia obviously (for the moment).

So what do you imagine will be the situation if the ECHR takes up the case and agrees that there has been a violation of Amanda's rights to a fair trial, and so on.

You understand Italy is committed to respecting and addressing such a finding by the ECHR, and that it takes precedence over Italian legal findings, no?

It's not insignificant. And if we're going to be adults about it, you should accept the criticism without a lot of noise and crying.

I understand your view. But literally no legitimate authority anywhere in the world is likely to agree with you, for all the reasons that have been well stated on these threads. There is no evidence that condemns Amanda and Raf. There never has been. Stefanoni's fraudulent results in the lab are not real, reliable, or honest.

Face it Mach, your team has screwed the pooch on this one. Justice is coming.

 

[Desert Fox]

Face it Mach, your team has screwed the pooch on this one. Justice is coming.

The ECHR is there to tell countries belonging to it that they screwed up and they need to make amends. If you are unwilling to accept that (as a country), why do you belong to it in the first place and what is its purpose?

 

[Kaosium]

To say that people must be afraid about retaliation from authorities when they speak in Italy is delusional. Thus is the land of wild and rabid dreams from which some Knox supporters should better depart, for the sake if the health, and have a look at the real world.

Kaosium you should be careful talking about things you don't have any clue about.

My 'clues' are the evidence I posted. It just so happens that I looked into it further a few years back whilst in a discussion on this subject with Alt+4. I came across data that indicated that amongst the countries with criminal defamation laws, Italy was not remarkable in that respect in frequency, middle of the pack, and none of them had very many. So you're right, speaking your mind in Italy generally isn't very dangerous.

It is with Mignini around though, his pattern is aberrant. 20 from the Monster of Florence, and how many is it for this case? I lost count! 2 from Oggi, two from Telenorba. Francesca Bene, Joe Cottonwood, Steve Shea, Frank Sfarzo, the 5 Sollecitos, 2 of Amanda's parents, Amanda herself (again) and that makes 16, but then there's the four guys testifying to Rudy Guede's story in prison (Alessi and co) and I guess Raffaele and Andrew Gumbul have to be added now too? I won't count Aviello though, I thought he deserved that one. We're at about twenty, again.

Only one person needed to be charged in both of those cases combined: Rudy Guede. Mignini found 'conspiracies' in both and charged them and others who complained. He's a nutter, Machiavelli.

 

[js202]

Kaosium you should be careful talking about things you don't have any clue about.

Next time you bring up matters of science, reason, law or philosophy you should take care to heed your own advice.

 

[Dan O.]

Barbie took the first, the second is part of the Dec, 18th 2007 package Charlie Wilkes posted here ages ago, the original link is gone, but the file has been preserved here.

The original link which I archived in my wiki almost 5 years ago still works today.


Here are extracts I posted 5 November 2013:

The first I believe is from Barbie's photo (with extreme color profile shifting). The second is from a news photo showing the new resident of the cottage.

ETA: Oops, that first attachment from my Nov. 5 post is not from Barbie's photo But this daily mail article.

 

[Bill Williams]

Amanda's conviction is final. It cannot be reversed nor annulled.

So if there IS a wrongful conviction in Italy, there is no redress? Not even a subsequent Cassazione session? Not even a presidential pardon?

It sounds like an unjust system to me.

 

[Bill Williams]

Why these dumb questions, after seven years?
Guede asked for a fast track trial. The others did not. And despite this his position was not separated.

His position was not separated?

Wait a minute. You're claiming that one has to be available for cross examination for Raffaele to separate himself from Amanda.....

If Raffaele Sollecito demanded Nencini to re-admit the GIP hearing and to be interrogated himself, he would have obtained that, and based on that Nencini could have satisfied in practice the defence request of splitting the positions. By offering Nencini a different version, different from that of Amanda Knox, and be cross questioned on it, and if that version was credible or anyway contained significant element, by doing this factually Sollecito would have opened the door to a separation of the evidence sets and roles.​

But Guede's position was not separated from Sollecito's/Knox's..... yet they accuse each other of different things.......? And Rudy was in one process (fast track) and S/K were in the full trial mode - and this is NOT separating them?

Machiavelli; you've kind of lost it in your argumentation.

 

[Bill Williams]

She also ignored that Guede chose the fast track trial, which is essentially equivalent to pleading guilty.

A fast track trial is not equivalent to pleading guilty.

Not in every case. However in this case, it was the equivalent of pleading guilty, to get the reduced sentence.

 

[Samson]

To say that people must be afraid about retaliation from authorities when they speak in Italy is delusional. Thus is the land of wild and rabid dreams from which some Knox supporters should better depart, for the sake if the health, and have a look at the real world.

Kaosium you should be careful talking about things you don't have any clue about.

This is clearly not true. What I have seen in the MOF, the Sarah Scazzi, and the Kercher cases, is that people are arrested, charged, and their lives are destroyed, financially.
I will speak from New Zealand here.
None of this has or ever can happen.
Given that Amanda was struck twice on the head from behind, and you agree because you do not counter the claim, we must never countenance arresting her parents for repeating the truthfull allegation.
However, by all means state that Amanda made a false statement about the physical blows, so we have it on record.

 

[anglolawyer]

Another thing that's worthy of examination is the area where the printed A4 notice saying "Locale Sottoposto a Sequestro" has been taped. That metal gate hinges on the left of the doorway (as seen from the outside), and it looks almost certain that the notice is covering over the fixing/locking point on the right of the doorway when the gate is shut. It looks very possible that the gate hasn't actually been locked shut, but that rather it is the notice and the tape around it that is keeping the gate closed to the right of the doorway.

Note the near-comical way in which by mid-December there has been a ludicrous amount of packing tape added around the notice. I believe that this may be the "crack" investigators' way of providing added "security" - "nobody will be able to get through this much packing tape, so hopefully they won't notice that this gate isn't actually locked shut underneath all this tape"

 

[Planigale]

One of the most interesting posts on this on PMF was Popper, who says the lay jurors vote first, youngest to oldest, and if the first 4, of 6 lay jurors and 2judges vote for acquittal, the process stops and the defendent is not guilty. This is treated with scepticism here, maybe Machiavelli could clarify.

I always wondered if this explained the Callunia conviction by Hellman. The lay judges voted for guilt so Helman had to go along with it hence the rather ambivalent motivation report.