Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

The issue is spelled out in Ibrahim at para. 164/170 (characterizing the Government's argument/characterizing the applicant's argument).

-Adverse use of exculpatory statements made under compulsion is violation of right against self-incrimination (Saunders)

-Adverse use of false "freely-made" statement is not violation of right against self-incrimination (Allen)

The issue would be whether there was "compulsion", which in my view is not a well-defined concept under ECHR caselaw. In my view there was compulsion and compulsion is easily found; however, I think that they would have had a shot at proving lack of compulsion.

But then that argument could be used in the current "simple" calunnia case.

I need to further digest Allen v the UK, but she was actually acquitted for manslaughter and the ECHR case I am looking at was about her being compensated.

 

[Machiavelli]

At trial, did Mignini ever invent dialog and put it into the defendant's mouth, which he claimed said, "It is easy to believe Knox said... 'You were such a little saint… now you are going to be forced to have sex'."?

A post disconnected from the discussion topics, that was drug dealers, no she- devil myth ( not even drug dealers story used) and about investigations.

 

[Diocletus]

But then that argument could be used in the current "simple" calunnia case.

I need to further digest Allen v the UK, but she was actually acquitted for manslaughter and the ECHR case I am looking at was about her being compensated.

This Allen case deals with tax evasion.

 

[Samson]

I got tired of looking at Andrew Hamilton, notwithstanding the great debt that we all owe him for his good works.

The new Avi is John Zacherle doing a Hamlet skit c. 1958.

This 1735 decision in New York helped to establish that truth is a defense to an accusation of libel.

Did Rita Ficcarra hit Amanda Knox or not Machiavelli?
I know she did because her account stands up to the scrutiny of the reasonable man/woman.

Therefore Mignini's action against her parents is another example of the behaviour of a thug protected by a malevolent state.

 

[Diocletus]

This 1735 decision in New York helped to establish that truth is a defense to an accusation of libel.

The crowning glory of Hamilton's career was his defense of John Peter Zenger in 1735, which he undertook pro bono. Zenger was a printer in New York City. In his newspaper, Zenger had asserted that judges were arbitrarily displaced, and new courts were erected, without the consent of the legislature, by which trials by jury were taken away when a governor was so disposed. The attorney-general charged him with libel, and Zenger's lawyers, objecting to the legality of the judge's commissions, were stricken from the list of attorneys.

Fearing that the advocate, who had subsequently been appointed by the court, might be overawed by the bench, at the head of which was Chief Justice De Lancey, a member of the governor's council, Hamilton voluntarily went to New York and appeared in the case. He admitted the printing and publishing of the article but advanced the doctrine, novel at the time, that the truth of the facts in the alleged libel could be set up as a defense and that in this proceeding the jury were judges of both the law and the facts.

The offer of evidence to prove the truth of Zenger's statements was rejected, but Hamilton then appealed to the jury to say from the evidence that they had met with in their daily lives that the contents of the defendant's article were true. He argued that the definition of libel which didn't require the accusations to be false came from the hated Star Chamber. His eloquence secured a verdict of "not guilty".

Amazing. Well, to me, anyway.

 

[Desert Fox]

Also, Rudy as "the dog" and "the professor", that's hard to imagine that Rudy is dealing with a full deck. Who knows what he was experiencing when he assaulted Meredith. Although he did reportedly brag about his exploits to his fellow inmates in jail, so maybe he's just one F****ed up guy.

Kind of chilling in that sounds likely he may go back to doing it once he gets out.

 

[Bill Williams]

A post disconnected from the discussion topics, that was drug dealers, no she- devil myth ( not even drug dealers story used) and about investigations.

Please follow back the thread to see that these kind of court theatrics were part and parcel of the over-all "she-devil" myth Mignini tried to foist on to the court, and more importantly to the public through the tabloids.

But it is also as Nina Burleigh reveals in her latest Newsweek cover story. With her interviews with Mignini he was always all over the map with his theories of this case. Sometimes it was she-devil, sometimes it was revenge sex, sometimes it was sex game gone wrong.

As even now disgraced Barbie Latza Nadeau wrote, coprosecutor Manuela Comodi threatened to quit the case if Mignini went into court with an explicit Satanic Rite theory. You may claim that never happened, but that's what Nadeau wrote.

The advantage for Mignini being all over the map is as you are using it right now. To deny any two of them are connected.

Judging from the news in both Italy, US, and UK, this strategy is fast crumbling and being seen for what it is. Cf. Burleigh.

I just hope it is in time for Cassazione next week. If Cassazione convicts, then Mignini will be exposed internationally.

 

[carbonjam72]

Kind of chilling in that sounds likely he may go back to doing it once he gets out.

Woof!, and, indubitably.

 

[JREF2010]

Do you realise that Porta a Porta is the same TV programme that forced Raffaele’s Father to acknowledge that there had not been any deal between the prosecutor’s office and Raffaele as stated in Raffaele’s book? I am sure you are hoping that particular show will not, indeed should not have any influence the ongoing legal proceedings against Raffaele and Andrew Gumbel, right?

Forced Raffaeles dad....lol

In a country where you can be thrown into jail without charges for a year, or charged with a prison sentence for saying something that might allow the Inbred-System to press charges, attack and toss you in prison...theres a lot of reasons someone might or might not say something.

Like the weasle Maresca, stating on tv the dna was found on the tip of the blade. Either he was
A) Maresca is a lying snake
B) Maresca is a complete guiltard and doesnt understand the DNA evidence at all.

Theres a mountain of examples of dishonest behavior by the Perugia police and Prosecution team in this case, and charges frivolously filed for those who have been speaking up.

I'd guess, Sollecito was being cautious.

 

[Dan O.]

...this is just one naked helicopter ride away from being a bestseller!

Antonio Curatolo was killed in a helicopter crash in Milan. Does that count?

http://www.senato.it/service/PDF/PDFServer/BGT/6464.pdf
on the afternoon of Sunday, September 24, 2000 a helicopter- Aeroclub Milano, while he was playing a tourist flight (or train- stramento) fell Parco Nord area, at that time crowded by thousands of people, who were walking or playing, as is daily and especially on Sundays;have lost their lives in the accident David Genovesi (instructor) and passenger Antonio Curatolo
​

 

[kwill]

Also kwill, without wishing to be pedantic, Leila says

Pi is not math. Pi is a number. Math is what you do with that number.

But Pi is surely not a number, it is a ratio. I know what she means, but why make such an easily falsifiable statement?
Disconcertingly, there are a small number of fine and analytical minds on PMF, as long as they discuss subjects other than the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Well, to be even more pedantic . . . math is not "what you do with numbers." Arithmetic is what you do with numbers. Arithmetic & the manipulation of numbers is not math any more than reciting the alphabet is literature.

Like Leila, I have a degree in math. I really can't figure out how she got mixed up with the PMF crew.

 

[carbonjam72]

Antonio Curatolo was killed in a helicopter crash in Milan. Does that count?

http://www.senato.it/service/PDF/PDFServer/BGT/6464.pdf
on the afternoon of Sunday, September 24, 2000 a helicopter- Aeroclub Milano, while he was playing a tourist flight (or train- stramento) fell Parco Nord area, at that time crowded by thousands of people, who were walking or playing, as is daily and especially on Sundays;have lost their lives in the accident David Genovesi (instructor) and passenger Antonio Curatolo
​

Don't tell me you're suggesting there was a body swap, or even a double swap?

 

[carbonjam72]

Well, to be even more pedantic . . . math is not "what you do with numbers." Arithmetic is what you do with numbers. Arithmetic & the manipulation of numbers is not math any more than reciting the alphabet is literature.

Like Leila, I have a degree in math. I really can't figure out how she got mixed up with the PMF crew.

Heard her daughter dated a friend of Rudy's, so technically, her daughter is actually much closer to Rudy's social circle than either Amanda or Raf.

Maybe deflecting guilt from Rudy, she thinks takes heat off her daughter? Possibly an unconscious bias?

 

[Kaosium]

Heard her daughter dated a friend of Rudy's, so technically, her daughter is actually much closer to Rudy's social circle than either Amanda or Raf.

Maybe deflecting guilt from Rudy, she thinks takes heat off her daughter? Possibly an unconscious bias?

Her daughter married Alex, the guy who hung around with Rudy. Her husband also tutored Rudy in prison for a while.

 

[Bill Williams]

Do you realise that Porta a Porta is the same TV programme that forced Raffaele’s Father to acknowledge that there had not been any deal between the prosecutor’s office and Raffaele as stated in Raffaele’s book? I am sure you are hoping that particular show will not, indeed should not have any influence the ongoing legal proceedings against Raffaele and Andrew Gumbel, right?

Forced Raffaeles dad....lol

In a country where you can be thrown into jail without charges for a year, or charged with a prison sentence for saying something that might allow the Inbred-System to press charges, attack and toss you in prison...theres a lot of reasons someone might or might not say something.

Like the weasle Maresca, stating on tv the dna was found on the tip of the blade. Either he was
A) Maresca is a lying snake
B) Maresca is a complete guiltard and doesnt understand the DNA evidence at all.

Theres a mountain of examples of dishonest behavior by the Perugia police and Prosecution team in this case, and charges frivolously filed for those who have been speaking up.

I'd guess, Sollecito was being cautious.

I was going to ask CoulsdonUK if this "gotcha" comment of his works both ways.

I am also with him that this show should not have any bearing whatsoever on Cassazione's decision. Except for one thing: courts are also sensitive to what's known as the "public interest". In my jurisdiction, that is one of the two criteria for proceeding with charges criminally.....

..... is it in the public interest to do so.

Without Porta a Porta and other media stuff, just how does a court measure this? The "public interest" DOES play a role in criminal proceedings.

It is my view that it is not in the public interest to send innocents to jail, just because the courts have turned a blind-eye (and demonstrably so) to a suspect-centric investigation and conviction.

 

[Desert Fox]

Woof!, and, indubitably.

I am wondering if in five years he will be caught attempting to attack a woman and the guilt side will try to blame Amanda for ruining him.

 

[carbonjam72]

Her daughter married Alex, the guy who hung around with Rudy. Her husband also tutored Rudy in prison for a while.

Guess who's coming to dinner?

What are the odds of having a murderer over for dinner? Higher for some, than for others.

 

[Numbers]

This Allen case deals with tax evasion.

Could you supply the application number? Thanks in advance.

ETA: Are you referring to Allen v UK 76574/01 (dec)? That seems to be a case about turning over financial information under penalty of law.

Here is an excerpt:

The right not to incriminate oneself is primarily concerned, however, with respecting the will of an accused person to remain silent in the context of criminal proceedings and the use made of compulsorily obtained information in criminal prosecutions. It does not per se prohibit the use of compulsory powers to require persons to provide information about their financial or company affairs (see the above mentioned Saunders judgment, where the procedure whereby the applicant was required to answer the questions of the Department of Trade Inspectors was not in issue). In the present case, therefore, the Court finds that the requirement on the applicant to make a declaration of his assets to the Inland Revenue does not disclose any issue under Article 6 § 1, even though a penalty was attached to a failure to do so. The obligation to make disclosure of income and capital for the purposes of the calculation and assessment of tax is indeed a common feature of the taxation systems of Contracting States and it would be difficult to envisage them functioning effectively without it.

In the US, the Constitutional right to not incriminate oneself does not extend to failing to report income for tax purposes, even if the income were gained illegally. Nor could one not turn over business papers and other objects under subpoena.

 

[Kaosium]

Guess who's coming to dinner?

What are the odds of having a murderer over for dinner? Higher for some, than for others.

Soon enough I suppose Michael (of PMF.net) may be finding out, he famously extended an invitation for Rudy to come live with him when he got out of prison.

 

[Diocletus]

Could you supply the application number? Thanks in advance.

ETA: Are you referring to Allen v UK 76574/01 (dec)? That seems to be a case about turning over financial information under penalty of law.

Here is an excerpt:


In the US, the Constitutional right to not incriminate oneself does not extend to failing to report income for tax purposes, even if the income were gained illegally. Nor could one not turn over business papers and other objects under subpoena.

Yes, that's the one. As I said, it's a tax case and so a different kind of case, in fact, the court notes that a requirement to provide information about financial affairs does not give rise to a compulsion concern.