Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

There's nothing the isc can do now to avoid an adverse echr judgment on the Calunnia claims. That can only be avoided by a settlement, in effect, a consent judgment entered by Italy against itself.

Whether in a friendly settlement, a unilateral settlement, or a judgment finding a violation, the State (Italy) will be either admitting to a violation (in a settlement) or being found responsible for one (judgment against it).

 

[lonepinealex]

Does anyone seriously think the ISC is going to do anything other than convict the pair next week? I'd love to think otherwise, but if they wanted to do the right thing they could have done so years ago.

 

[Diocletus]

Whether in a friendly settlement, a unilateral settlement, or a judgment finding a violation, the State (Italy) will be either admitting to a violation (in a settlement) or being found responsible for one (judgment against it).

It's a pretty powerful gun that the Italian judiciary has just put into the hands of the Italian government. The Italian government could just turn around and say "yup, Italy violated her rights" and the Italian judiciary, and only the Italian judiciary, would be the fool.

That's a lot of leverage.

 

[Diocletus]

Does anyone seriously think the ISC is going to do anything other than convict the pair next week? I'd love to think otherwise, but if they wanted to do the right thing they could have done so years ago.

Common sense tells me that they have to remand this or punt it over to a unified session, because it's too risky for them to lose control of the case.

Therefore, I think they will convict.

 

[lonepinealex]

Common sense tells me that they have to remand this or punt it over to a unified session, because it's too risky for them to lose control of the case.

Therefore, I think they will convict.

Ha! Yeah I'm with you there...

 

[Numbers]

chistianahanna,

In reference to your comments about Mignini, I am not sure which posters on the forum you are referring to as "you all (collectively)". It would be fair to say that many posters, at least on the innocence side, are aware that Mignini was prosecuted in Italy for abuse of power, was convicted of this crime, and then the case was cancelled (if that is the right term) due to procedural time limits. I personally believe that this is an illustration of the use of procedural time limits to shelter officials who commit misconduct from accountability.

I would not be able to adequately and politely characterize my own opinion of Mignini and the enabling officials in the Italian police and judicial system who have carried out this intentional vicious miscarriage of justice on two innocent young people.

We can call this a lie. You are seemingly "forgetting" that Mignini and Giuttari were proven innocent of the main charge (allegedly having forged the voice recording of a conversation) already in the first instance, the their conviction on remaining charges was annulled, not because of time limitation - which would be legally impossible, time limits at that stage only effect the penal consequence but not the civil and disciplinary ones nor the fact finding - but it was annulled because their whole prosecution was performed by an illegitimate authority, given that the Florentine magistrates prosecuting him and the offended parties were the same people. So not only the conviction, but the entire case, including the indictment and even the investigation was annulled. The investigation file, basically blank, was sent to Turin. Only at that point the time limitations enter into play, because Turin prosecution office won't start an investigation from scratch on hypothetical charges that have expired even theoretically and are no longer prosecutable.

{Highlighting added to quote.}

Machiavelli,

Thank you for providing some detail which I left out of this complicated story of the abuse of power by an Italian prosecutor, Mignini, and how the Italian judicial system protected him from any accountability for his misconduct.

In the simplified statement in my post, I only mentioned the time-limitation trick used to protect Mignini from accountability. You very kindly bring out that other trick, where either by the incompetence so typical of the Italian judiciary, or by their also typical intentional obstructionism, the prosecution of Mignini was conducted in the judicial district where he had (allegedly) violated the rights of one or more judges by abuse of power. So the finding of guilt in that district had questionable validity, and the trial was moved to another judicial district. Then the case ran out of time.

There is nothing in the treatment of the case against Mignini by the Italian judicial authorities which contradicts the proposition that he was protected from accountability from serious charges of abuse of power.

 

[Numbers]

Common sense tells me that they have to remand this or punt it over to a unified session, because it's too risky for them to lose control of the case.

Therefore, I think they will convict.

This is the best explanation I have seen about the thought process which ultimately underlies Italian jurisprudence.

 

[js202]

This is the best explanation I have seen about the thought process which ultimately underlies Italian jurisprudence.

Concur. Straight to the point and true.

 

[Numbers]

Statement from the article about the juror:

"The jurors constructed a timeline with mobile phone records and statements from the witnesses that showed how the pair could have been at the murder scene at the time of death, but she questioned whether it was sufficient proof to condemn them."

Really? Where's the timeline? And more importantly, what is the time of death, because it's not disclosed in Nencini's report.

Also, "they could have been there" is not sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In Italy, are the jurors instructed that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, according to Italian law? And ECHR case-law?

De facto, the Italian standard appears to be, if there are at least two compatibilities in the case, the defendant is guilty.

 

[Machiavelli]

You mean like when you "pointed out" that Amanda was having sex with drug dealers and Rudy was her pimp? LOL.

I said that Knox had contacts with drug dealers, because it's a proven fact. At least one of the contacts was sexual it's her own admission (but alternative reasons for contacts are not many, just one).
But I did not da Guede was her pimp. This is one of Bill's inventions.

 

[Diocletus]

In Italy, are the jurors instructed that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, according to Italian law? And ECHR case-law?

De facto, the Italian standard appears to be, if there are at least two compatibilities in the case, the defendant is guilty.

Didn't the jurors also draw a timeline that shows that the defendants might have been at Sollecito's place at the time of death? Why not?

 

[Bill Williams]

Does anyone seriously think the ISC is going to do anything other than convict the pair next week? I'd love to think otherwise, but if they wanted to do the right thing they could have done so years ago.

The Italian system baffles me. So I cannot predict, which is just as well because I've been wrong with all my predictions so far.

The only good thing about convicting is that finally it is out of the hands of the divided judiciary in that country, a division even our friend Machiavelli admits to - he's just on the other side of it.

It then becomes a political matter, potentially involving two sovereign nations. These nations have a treaty, but nothing in any treaty eclipses fundamental sovereignty. What the treaty does, in the main, is provide legal reach into the other's system.

And as the Lawrencia Bembenek case demonstrated, what were matters belonging to the sovereign State of Wisconsin, became murky when the Canadian government engaged the US/Canada extradition treaty.

So, the Italian judiciary may wash its hands next week, but then it becomes the politician's problem. I know nothing of Italian back-room intrigue, but if I were into conspiracies (!) I'd be thinking that Roman politicians telephones will be burning this weekend, with calls to the ISC judges saying, "End this, and end it in a way that doesn't force us to make fools of you."

But that's just me.

 

[Diocletus]

I said that Knox had contacts with drug dealers, because it's a proven fact. At least one of the contacts was sexual it's her own admission (but alternative reasons for contacts are not many, just one).
But I did not da Guede was her pimp. This is one of Bill's inventions.

I don't know what you're talking about. Knox never had sex with Silenzi or Curatalo or any of the other drug-addled denizens of Perugia, which appears to include just about everyone including Nara. And now we find out from Burleigh that even Mignini is addicted to "sinus" medications. What a circus.

 

[Numbers]

Does anyone seriously think the ISC is going to do anything other than convict the pair next week? I'd love to think otherwise, but if they wanted to do the right thing they could have done so years ago.

Here is the actual Italian CSC procedure, written in a secret code (the CPPPP), and recently decoded by a supercomputer after years of calculation:

1. Take a six-sided die
2. Place the die in a cup.
3. Shake the cup and throw the die.
4. If the dots on the die show an odd number, finalize a conviction verdict.
5. If the dots on the die show an even number, refer the case to a lower court with instructions to convict but with production of a less incredible motivation report.
6. If there is some other result from the die toss, form a United Sections panel to hear the case.

 

[Bill Williams]

I said that Knox had contacts with drug dealers, because it's a proven fact. At least one of the contacts was sexual it's her own admission (but alternative reasons for contacts are not many, just one).
But I did not da Guede was her pimp. This is one of Bill's inventions.

In fairness, Machiavelli, that was not one of my "inventions". I was told you'd said this, I put it to you, and you gave a reasonable explanation as to why your position was not this.

I took some time to review your posts on IIP about this, and could find nothing about it - in the strict sense.

You may not have noticed that I have not put this to you since. But it is telling that you would bring it up as if I had.

ETA - oh yes, and BTW, EVERYONE had contacts with drug dealers in Perugia. It was a college town for pete's sake!

 

[Diocletus]

Here is the actual Italian CSC procedure, written in a secret code (the CPPPP), and recently decoded by a supercomputer after years of calculation:

1. Take a six-side die
2. Place the die in a cup.
3. Shake the cup and throw the die.
4. If the dots on the die show an odd number, finalize a conviction verdict.
5. If the dots on the die show an even number, refer the case to a lower court with instructions to convict but with production of a less incredible motivation report.
6. If there is some other result from the die toss, form a United Sections panel to hear the case.

You forgot the first step: wait for 8 years.

 

[Kauffer]

Things have hotted up, I see. PMF people upset with Nina Burleigh and the Daily Mail and McCall keeps getting spanked by thoughtful over the postale police and the 112 calls. There's nothing like a civil war. The guilters' future is just that - perpetual civil war.

As many of us have analysed - sources suggest an extradition request will not be made in the event of a confirmation. That will upset them even more.

 

[Bill Williams]

Here is the actual Italian CSC procedure, written in a secret code (the CPPPP), and recently decoded by a supercomputer after years of calculation:

1. Take a six-side die
2. Place the die in a cup.
3. Shake the cup and throw the die.
4. If the dots on the die show an odd number, finalize a conviction verdict.
5. If the dots on the die show an even number, refer the case to a lower court with instructions to convict but with production of a less incredible motivation report.
6. If there is some other result from the die toss, form a United Sections panel to hear the case.

Here is the process..... the PM at trial claims that Raffaele Sollecito once rolled a single die, and got a "4" as a result. It is unknown WHEN he rolled this "4", because rolls are not time stamped.

This "4" was later found on the hooks of a torn bra-clasp. The Scientific Police, led by Stefanoni, recovered this bra-hook using contaminated gloves with the ink from the inside of the pips of the die all over them.

Stefanoni then took the bra-clasp back to her lab, and started throwing single die to see if she should come up with a "4" herself. As luck would have it, the first 12 throws failed to achieve a "4", so she dutifully marked those attempts, "LCN".

Then on the 13th try she got a "4". She then reported to the court that this "4" she found in her lab was compatible with the "4" found on the clasp, even though it was known that in Perugia there were 280 men who also had once rolled a four.

I believe that to be a fair rendering.

 

[Bill Williams]

Things have hotted up, I see. PMF people upset with Nina Burleigh and the Daily Mail and McCall keeps getting spanked by thoughtful over the postale police and the 112 calls. There's nothing like a civil war. The guilters' future is just that - perpetual civil war.

As many of us have analysed - sources suggest an extradition request will not be made in the event of a confirmation. That will upset them even more.

Maybe they will split again. In March 2011 they were, publicly, a happy family. Then the lone PMF went off-line for a week. Then it came back up, and it took a few days to notice - there were TWO of them! They do their best to keep the tensions under wraps, but every once in a while one of the original combatants breaks the silence to claim that they are the real repositories of Meredith's memory.

 

[NancyS]

I said that Knox had contacts with drug dealers, because it's a proven fact. At least one of the contacts was sexual it's her own admission (but alternative reasons for contacts are not many, just one).

I can't believe you are still peddling this 'dirty old man' porn version? Can't you and Mignini just go to the cinema and see Fifty Shades of Grey, I'm sure it is more realistic than this sexed up nonsense - This kind of nonsense is incredibly sexist and offensive to women