Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[js202]

The first thing you must do if you want to discuss a possible conspiracy is list all the conspirators and their motivation for maintaining the conspiracy for all these years. When I see such a list then we will be able to begin to discuss it.

That's actually putting the cart before the horse, from an investigative perspective. First *the evidence* must be proven to reveal - in a Peter Gill/John Douglas world, not the Alice in Wonderland one of the Perugians and the guilters - a scenario that cannot be innocently explained. Given that any actual scientific results indicative of what Diocletus believes with regard to the downstairs apartment have surely been destroyed, this is a tall order bordering on impossibility.

But if it *could be proven*, the evidence would drive the theory, and then the individuals with responsibility over the proper care and release of the evidence would be identified, and fall like so many tin soldiers.

My own opinion is that, rather than any conspiracy per se, the facts of this case point more to political and sociological phenomena underpinning any sort of "cover-up." There's ample evidence that such behavior is business as usual, and that many Italians would not recognize what we perceive as gobsmacking amorality as anything other than normative.

 

[lonepinealex]

The thing that makes me most suspicious about what happened downstairs is Guede saying he heard someone.

 

[js202]

The thing that makes me most suspicious about what happened downstairs is Guede saying he heard someone.

Absolutely. This is of a piece with the way that he seemed to do his best to create a BS narrative that accounted for phenomena that may have been seen or overheard by witnesses of the crime, or uncovered later by investigators.

 

[Machiavelli]

Thank you for explaining the 'right to silence' of Guede.

My reading of the above is that Pascali may have been right and the fact someone else did something does not prove him wrong. A simple analogy if I am asked to take out an appendix and decline but a surgeon does so successfully, it does not make my refusal wrong. In a rapidly evolving technology such as genetics, a view that trying to test a low level of DNA one year may be correct and be different the next year in a better equipped lab.

But Pascali apparently was too much behind the state of art to be credible. There was less than a year between his test and the RIS one, and his "caution" was not justified. Moreover if he had severe technological limits compared to modern technology, he should have pointed that out.
He was sent to trial because he was deceptive, not because he was not evolute enough. His justification for not testing was not credible. The comparison is not with a surgeon who refuses while another does right, he is like a surgeon who refuses on an operation that any other surgeon would carry on, based on false and deceptive reasons, or without even informing the patient that he refused

 

[Diocletus]

But Pascali apparently was too much behind the state of art to be credible. There was less than a year between his test and the RIS one, and his "caution" was not justified. Moreover if he had severe technological limits compared to modern technology, he should have pointed that out.
He was sent to trial because he was deceptive, not because he was not evolute enough. His justification for not testing was not credible. The comparison is not with a surgeon who refuses while another does right, he is like a surgeon who refuses on an operation that any other surgeon would carry on, based on false and deceptive reasons, or without even informing the patient that he refused

I guess that Pascali doesn't run an LCN lab, and so he was perfectly justified in not compromising his technique and protocol. Stefanoni doesn't run an LCN lab, either, but she clearly couldn't care less about technique and protocol. I'm sure that Stefanoni would have jammed those samples through. Maybe she would have gotten lucky; on the other hand, the odds are good that she would have come up with Meredith Kercher's DNA.

Apparently, RIS does run an LCN lab.

 

[Machiavelli]

Your statement above is either unclear or incorrect. If by "treaty" you are referring to the extradition treaty between the US and Italy, there is no reference within it to the Strasbourg Convention. Nor is there any reference to extradition treaties in the Strasbourg Convention. They are independent in that sense.

If you are referring to some other treaty, please identify it in more detail.

You pointed out a correct feature about the Strasbourg convention about transfer of detainees: Countries must agree to transfer.
However in the case of Silvia Baraldini the US had also violated principles of conventions against torture and, as by the UD Supreme Court, her constitutional rights protecting individuals from inhumane and degrading treatments. Also the right to health and livable conditions was violated. This refers specifically to the three years she spent in a special unit of Lexington prison, where she was subjected to an appalling regime of sleep deprivation (following which she developed a cancer).
As a consequence of this violation, Italy requested the application of the Strasbourg convention. Indeed the US refused.

As for Pietro Venezia instead, he was sentenced to the same sentence of Sollecito and Knox, the normal punishment that anyone would receive for that crime, and he was subjected to a normal prison regime without any favour. That would have been the outcome in any event if Venezia's constitutional rights were respected. The Constitutional court assessed that if he was sent to Florida, a death penalty state, on that charge, his constitutional rights would be violated even if the death penalty was not applied.
It is true that by deciding this, the CC factually cancelled a part of the extradition treaty (it is impossible to extradite a citizen to a place and under conditions where his fundamental rights will be violated).

 

[Numbers]

I don't think you can close the conspiracy ring with the DNA lab alone.

Are the boys from downstairs in or out of the conspiracy?. Are they working with Guede so therefore Stefanoni is covering up their own conspiracy?!

And then there is the question: Why?

Does the incompetent lab tech declare that this is cats blood and everybody else says "oh, sorry about breaking down the doors and trashing the place". Or, has Mignini gotten involved and realizes this downstairs scene is incompatible with his theory that the American roommate is responsible for the murder?


My position is that there is no evidence from downstairs that shows Amanda and Raffaele were involved and the evidence of downstairs is not needed to show that they weren't.

I imagine there will be some review of the whole case in the blowback after Amanda and Raffaele are declared innocent. Only then will additional information or proof of a coverup be extracted from the DNA lab.

I believe the boys downstairs were intimated by the police and prosecutor.
I think many people in Italy find their police/judicial system intimidating, based on MOF and this case. People know how easily they can be framed or charged with calunnia or defamation. These are laws and practices from the 1930s.

Giacomo was growing mj. Could he be charged if the cops/prosecutor wanted?

 

[Machiavelli]

I guess that Pascali doesn't run an LCN lab, and so he was perfectly justified in not compromising his technique and protocol. Stefanoni doesn't run an LCN lab, either, but she clearly couldn't care less about technique and protocol. I'm sure that Stefanoni would have jammed those samples through. Maybe she would have gotten lucky; on the other hand, the odds are good that she would have come up with Meredith Kercher's DNA.

Apparently, RIS does run an LCN lab.

I'm not sure something like an "LCN lab" exists, but anyway Pascali didn't refuse to test the items, he didn't even tell the court that he was not sufficiently equipped, or that some further tests could be performed by more equipped teams. On the contrary he boasted that he was better than the RIS, and that he was the master. He even attacked the RIS report she it came out. Later he backtracked and admitted he was in error.
But the court didn't believe it was an error. They thought he was protecting the people and institutions involved in covering up for the Elisa Claps murder.

 

[carbonjam72]

I'm not sure something like an "LCN lab" exists, but anyway Pascali didn't refuse to test the items, he didn't even tell the court that he was not sufficiently equipped, or that some further tests could be performed by more equipped teams. On the contrary he boasted that he was better than the RIS, and that he was the master. He even attacked the RIS report she it came out. Later he backtracked and admitted he was in error.
But the court didn't believe it was an error. They thought he was protecting the people and institutions involved in covering up for the Elisa Claps murder.

It sure sounds like there's a lot of covering up for people and institutions in Italy! Is it something in the water?

 

[Diocletus]

It is true that by deciding this, the CC factually cancelled a part of the extradition treaty (it is impossible to extradite a citizen to a place and under conditions where his fundamental rights will be violated).

Glad we can agree on that. It's a fundamental right in the US not to be convicted after you've been acquitted by a jury. So, Italy will have no problem with the US rejecting Knox's extradition. Shoot, we'll even retry her if the Italian authorities will turn over all of the evidence they have.

 

[Diocletus]

However in the case of Silvia Baraldini the US had also violated principles of conventions against torture and, as by the UD Supreme Court, her constitutional rights protecting individuals from inhumane and degrading treatments. Also the right to health and livable conditions was violated. This refers specifically to the three years she spent in a special unit of Lexington prison, where she was subjected to an appalling regime of sleep deprivation (following which she developed a cancer).

LOL. Every prisoner claims that. Did the food suck, too?

 

[Numbers]

You pointed out a correct feature about the Strasbourg convention about transfer of detainees: Countries must agree to transfer.
However in the case of Silvia Baraldini the US had also violated principles of conventions against torture and, as by the UD Supreme Court, her constitutional rights protecting individuals from inhumane and degrading treatments. Also the right to health and livable conditions was violated. This refers specifically to the three years she spent in a special unit of Lexington prison, where she was subjected to an appalling regime of sleep deprivation (following which she developed a cancer).
As a consequence of this violation, Italy requested the application of the Strasbourg convention. Indeed the US refused.

As for Pietro Venezia instead, he was sentenced to the same sentence of Sollecito and Knox, the normal punishment that anyone would receive for that crime, and he was subjected to a normal prison regime without any favour. That would have been the outcome in any event if Venezia's constitutional rights were respected. The Constitutional court assessed that if he was sent to Florida, a death penalty state, on that charge, his constitutional rights would be violated even if the death penalty was not applied.
It is true that by deciding this, the CC factually cancelled a part of the extradition treaty (it is impossible to extradite a citizen to a place and under conditions where his fundamental rights will be violated).

Wikipedia (in an article with a caution that it lacks citations) has this on Silvia Baraldini, which includes stating that she was transferred to Italy {highlighting added}:

Silvia Baraldini (born in Rome, Italy, December 12, 1947) is an Italian activist. She was active in both the Black Power and Puerto Rican independence movements in the United States in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. In 1982 she was sentenced to 43 years under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) for conspiring to commit two armed robberies, driving a secondary getaway car during the prison break of murder convict and fellow political activist Assata Shakur (a.k.a. Joanne Chesimard) and for contempt of court for refusing to testify before a Grand Jury that was investigating the activities of the Puerto Rican independence movement.[1]

Although the government sustained that her sentence was appropriate given the serious nature of her crimes, her supporters argued that her harsh sentence was due to her unpopular political beliefs. Baraldini was imprisoned in numerous high-security facilities in the United States, including the notorious basement unit of a Federal Prison in Lexington, Kentucky which housed two other women, Susan Rosenberg and Alejandrina Torres, also convicted of politically motivated crimes. The unit was sharply criticized by Amnesty International and its closure was eventually ordered by U.S. District Judge Barrington Parker. After being transferred to Italy in 1999 to serve the remainder of her sentence, she was released on September 26, 2006, thanks to a pardon law approved in the previous months by the Italian Parliament. Italian journalist Lucio Manisco acted in favor of Silvia Baraldini's extradition, he was then a foreign correspondent of Italian Public TV Rai3 (1987-1992).
On August 24, 1999, upon an agreement reached between the Department of Justice and the Italian Ministry of Justice (headed at the time by Mr. Oliviero Diliberto, a member of the Party of Italian Communists), she was transferred to Italy to serve the remainder of her sentence. The terms of the transfer called for her to remain in Italian prison until March 2008. In 2001, she was released on house arrest, permitted to work for the City of Rome between 9 a.m. to 2 p.m each day. She was released from detention on September 26, 2006, thanks to a general pardon law approved in the previous months by the Italian Parliament. That happened despite the agreement with the Government of the United States which stated that she had to remain in prison until 2008.

 

[Magister]

Stefanoni invented some nonsense about a kitten cutting itself on the broken glass from the front door..

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/

Marco Marzan, one of the downstairs residents, said he could not believe that one of his cats could have left so much blood in Stefano's room.

 

[Diocletus]

However in the case of Silvia Baraldini the US had also violated principles of conventions against torture and, as by the UD Supreme Court, her constitutional rights protecting individuals from inhumane and degrading treatments. Also the right to health and livable conditions was violated. This refers specifically to the three years she spent in a special unit of Lexington prison, where she was subjected to an appalling regime of sleep deprivation (following which she developed a cancer).
As a consequence of this violation, Italy requested the application of the Strasbourg convention. Indeed the US refused.

You left out the part about how Italy lied to the US about keeping her locked up. They lie to everyone. They lied to India. They also lied to the US Senate when they agree to extradite people if the death penalty is taken off the table.

 

[carbonjam72]

Glad we can agree on that. It's a fundamental right in the US not to be convicted after you've been acquitted by a jury. So, Italy will have no problem with the US rejecting Knox's extradition. Shoot, we'll even retry her if the Italian authorities will turn over all of the evidence they have.

That would be a short trial.

This case would never have made it into a US or UK courtroom, no jury would ever get to vote on it. It would get kicked in pre-trial, for lack of any evidence.

It's a zero evidence, fact free, motive free, fantasy cooked up by an Italian madman, with a history of similarly crazy cases.

10 minutes in a proper court in it would all be over. And then the investigations would begin over how it all got started, evidence collection, lab procedures, coercive interrogations, bogus witnesses, leaks to the press - and false leaks at that - all of it.

 

[sept79]

I believe the boys downstairs were intimidated by the police and prosecutor.

I think many people in Italy find their police/judicial system intimidating, based on MOF and this case. People know how easily they can be framed or charged with calunnia or defamation. These are laws and practices from the 1930s.

Giacomo was growing mj. Could he be charged if the cops/prosecutor wanted?

This is probably why Amanda's roommates Laura Mezzetti and Filomena Romanelli lawyered up almost immediately.

 

[Bill Williams]

That would be a short trial.

This case would never have made it into a US or UK courtroom, no jury would ever get to vote on it. It would get kicked in pre-trial, for lack of any evidence.

It's a zero evidence, fact free, motive free, fantasy cooked up by an Italian madman, with a history of similarly crazy cases.

10 minutes in a proper court in it would all be over. And then the investigations would begin over how it all got started, evidence collection, lab procedures, coercive interrogations, bogus witnesses, leaks to the press - and false leaks at that - all of it.

The difference in Italy seems to be that prosecutors get to allege things without evidence. Then the judge seems to get to turn to the defense and instruct them to prove the prosecution wrong.

Like Machiavelli's claim that Stefanoni has a Ph.D. He asserts it, yet provides no proof and challenges US to prove him wrong.

Or Stefanoni's letter about the requirement that she turn over the EDFs. All she has to do is say, "Are they calling me a liar!?" and the court caves in. You wouldn't want to call her a liar.... even if she is one!

 

[js202]

The difference in Italy seems to be that prosecutors get to allege things without evidence. Then the judge seems to get to turn to the defense and instruct them to prove the prosecution wrong.

Like Machiavelli's claim that Stefanoni has a Ph.D. He asserts it, yet provides no proof and challenges US to prove him wrong.

Or Stefanoni's letter about the requirement that she turn over the EDFs. All she has to do is say, "Are they calling me a liar!?" and the court caves in. You wouldn't want to call her a liar.... even if she is one!

They also muster two out of three judges managing smirks in the face of such things as: four fried computer hard drives, untested putative semen stains, and a critical piece of evidence stored in an aqueous buffer guaranteed to obviate its repeatability.

The American south, especially, has had its instances of collusion and hanging judges, but such things would've made the magistrate who condemned George Stinney blush.

 

[Machiavelli]

It sure sounds like there's a lot of covering up for people and institutions in Italy! Is it something in the water?

Masonry and Catholic Church, with its connected parallel associations, are the institutions most involved in covering ups, and they are dominating actors in Italian life.

 

[js202]

Masonry and Catholic Church, with its connected parallel associations, are the institutions most involved in covering ups, and they are dominating actors in Italian life.

Classic case of projection. No doubt your nearest and dearest - Mignini and Maresca - could teach the Black Pope unforgettable lessons.