Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Samson]

Aw, that’s sweet.
I thought we were done after the last little mishap. Apparently not.
BTW Such misrepresentation is probably a breach of the MA. Of course you could always claim you were honestly mistaken

This is too labyrinthn to untangle via your links to previous posts,

but platonov:

If you can find any link to show two hours can elapse between eating and food progressing to the duodenum, you will have got to the point where Meredith might have eaten before 7pm.
A far more useful suggestion is to debunk Ms Lalli, and claim she suppressed photos or lied about her meticulous autopsy.

 

[Machiavelli]

Here's a snippet of translation from an article link that MAch posted about Stfanoni supporting a complaint against Pascali in another court case -

From the article of 2014 - Stef seems to be suggesting that Pascali's being careful about proceeding to test LCN DNA is no longer warranted, given advances in LCN DNA testing. Again, Stef doesn't seem to grasp the importance of protocols, and the dangers of contamination, but maybe I'm misreading here -

The fact is it tudner out Stefanoni was right, because when the Carabinieri RIS analyzed Pascali's items again they found multiple traces of suspect Danilo Restivo.

 

[Machiavelli]

You're right about both points.

In fact, almost everyone in America remembers this failure of Italy to extradite Pietro Venezia, despite the terms of the extradition treaty.

And domestic politics may be a lawful consideration of the Secretary of State; he or she has absolute discretion NOT to extradite.

It's worth mention that Pietro Venezia was put on trial and found guilty.

This notion should be couple with the fact that the US not only have signed an extradition treaty with Italy, they also signed the Strasbourg convention (a multi-lateral treaty), which would hava allowed Pietro Venezia to come back to Italy anyway to serve his sentence if he chose so.

Would the USA have complied with the Strasbourg convention?

 

[Diocletus]

It's worth mention that Pietro Venezia was put on trial and found guilty.

This notion should be couple with the fact that the US not only have signed an extradition treaty with Italy, they also signed the Strasbourg convention (a multi-lateral treaty), which would hava allowed Pietro Venezia to come back to Italy anyway to serve his sentence if he chose so.

Would the USA have complied with the Strasbourg convention?

Probably not, because Italy violated that treaty, too. They asked for some woman convict back to Italy, promised to make her serve her term, and then promptly released her.

 

[Diocletus]

It's worth mention that Pietro Venezia was put on trial and found guilty.

This notion should be couple with the fact that the US not only have signed an extradition treaty with Italy, they also signed the Strasbourg convention (a multi-lateral treaty), which would hava allowed Pietro Venezia to come back to Italy anyway to serve his sentence if he chose so.

Would the USA have complied with the Strasbourg convention?

Well, yeah. He freely admits that he shot and killed a government official. Thank heavens Italy made him spend a whole 10 years in jail.

What's worth mentioning is that the treaty already addressed death penalty situations, there was no death penalty possible, and the Italian court decided to breach the treaty anyway. Whoops.

 

[Machiavelli]

Machiavelli wrote
Not to speak about the impossibility to fit ("equally well") a one assailant scenario with the autopsy report and the blood splatter analysis. Or the contradiction with Capezzali and Monacchia's testimony of a scream and (Capezzali) steps on the gravel path immediately after.

My understanding is that he/she is not using the drug addict although never know if that witness is being completely discarded by Machiavelli.

Capezzali was the old lady and Monacchia was a young school teacher. I actually was not familiar with Monacchia

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=7189205
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/04/14/ear-witness-against-amanda-knox-mixed-up-nights/

They are apparently neighbors. . . .Too easy for them to have spoken to each others.

They are not neighbours. Unless you assume all people living in Via Pinturicchio are neighbours who chat with each other. But anyway you can't say the witnesses are lying because they could have spoken to each other. This makes no sense, again it's a non-argument.

 

[Samson]

Probably not, because Italy violated that treaty, too. They asked for some woman convict back to Italy, promised to make her serve her term, and then promptly released her.

NZ not too happy with the French for doing that after their agents sank the Rainbow Warrior 1974, and we caught'em but let them go. Dominique Prieux managed to get pregnant while in captivity on a French atoll and get home to a hero's welcome. (from memory)

 

[Machiavelli]

Well, yeah. He freely admits that he shot and killed a government official. Thank heavens Italy made him spend a whole 10 years in jail.

What's worth mentioning is that the treaty already addressed death penalty situations, there was no death penalty possible, and the Italian court decided to breach the treaty anyway. Whoops.

Don't take your eyes away from the Strasbourg convention. Do you know the implications?

 

[Machiavelli]

Probably not, because Italy violated that treaty, too. They asked for some woman convict back to Italy, promised to make her serve her term, and then promptly released her.

I see you are making confusion again (just like with the Novelli report).

That woman you are talking about, at that time was still in jail in the USA, and she was in jail exactly because the USA violated the Strasbourg convention.
She should have had her right to be in Italy granted since fifteen years, but the US refused to apply the Strasbourg convention.

So the US record was already a violation of the Strasbourg convention.

The US complied with the Strasbourg convention only on 1999 (after Italian outrage caused by the Cermis massacre and by the American pharcical trial ending with the acquittal of the perpetrators).

But at the time of Pietro Venezia's arrest, the US was in full violation of the Strasbourg convention and thus, there would be no guarantees that Pietro Venezia would be granted his right to be back to Italy if he was tried in the US.

 

[Diocletus]

Don't take your eyes away from the Strasbourg convention. Do you know the implications?

Yeah, she'll file a habeas petition, and Italy will go on trial in Seattle.

 

[Diocletus]

But at the time of Pietro Venezia's arrest, the US was in full violation of the Strasbourg convention and thus, there would be no guarantees that Pietro Venezia would be granted his right to be back to Italy if he was tried in the US.

That's nice. But it has nothing to do with the decision not to extradite. The reason for the decision was that Florida has a death penalty on the books (which could not be applied to the Italian murdrer)

 

[Machiavelli]

Sorry, but an adjudicated human right violation trumps all.

You should adjust the statement above, to make it fit to all your responses, a statement to paste as a response to anything so you won't need to write one every time; the adjusted response you should write is:

Who cares. Chuzpah trumps all.

 

[Bill Williams]

I see you are making confusion again (just like with the Novelli report).

That woman you are talking about, at that time was still in jail in the USA, and she was in jail exactly because the USA violated the Strasbourg convention.
She should have had her right to be in Italy granted since fifteen years, but the US refused to apply the Strasbourg convention.

So the US record was already a violation of the Strasbourg convention.

The US complied with the Strasbourg convention only on 1999 (after Italian outrage caused by the Cermis massacre and by the American pharcical trial ending with the acquittal of the perpetrators).

But at the time of Pietro Venezia's arrest, the US was in full violation of the Strasbourg convention and thus, there would be no guarantees that Pietro Venezia would be granted his right to be back to Italy if he was tried in the US.

Machiavelli - have you found Stefanoni's C.V.? Something tells me we won't be hearing from you much on this....

 

[Machiavelli]

That's nice. But it has nothing to do with the decision not to extradite. The reason for the decision was that Florida has a death penalty on the books (which could not be applied to the Italian murdrer)

It could be applied, theoretically.

But I think in Pietro Venezia's legal strategy of opposing extradition, the lack of guaranteees that he could come back to Italy is what plaid the major role.

 

[Machiavelli]

Machiavelli - have you found Stefanoni's C.V.? Something tells me we won't be hearing from you much on this....

I am not even searching for it.

You are perfectly able to retrieve her CV yourself by writing an e-mail, if you need it.

 

[tsig]

You're right about both points.

In fact, almost everyone in America remembers this failure of Italy to extradite Pietro Venezia, despite the terms of the extradition treaty.

And domestic politics may be a lawful consideration of the Secretary of State; he or she has absolute discretion NOT to extradite.

Pietro who?

 

[Diocletus]

You should adjust the statement above, to make it fit to all your responses, a statement to paste as a response to anything so you won't need to write one every time; the adjusted response you should write is:

Who cares. Chuzpah trumps all.

That's very dramatic, but unfortunately makes no sense.

 

[Machiavelli]

Don't take your eyes away from the Strasbourg convention. Do you know the implications?

The treaty goes together with the Strasbourg convention. You can't have one without the other.

But it is a fact that the two justice models appear to pursue some goals ideologically opposed between each other.
The US system seems to place great importance in punshment (identifies justice with a punishment) while the Italian system places a greater importance on the determination of a judicial truth (identifies justice with establishing a truth, while punishment is secondary).

 

[Desert Fox]

They are not neighbours. Unless you assume all people living in Via Pinturicchio are neighbours who chat with each other. But anyway you can't say the witnesses are lying because they could have spoken to each other. This makes no sense, again it's a non-argument.

You just showed that you have read nothing I have posted about human memory. . . .Why should anybody take your position seriously?

 

[Bill Williams]

Machiavelli - have you found Stefanoni's C.V.? Something tells me we won't be hearing from you much on this....

I am not even searching for it.

You are perfectly able to retrieve her CV yourself by writing an e-mail, if you need it.

Ok, be that way.