Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vibio]

Re: Amanda Knox convicted criminal. Numbers: Knox is indeed a convicted criminal and did jail time for it. You seem to forget she
was accused of more than murder. Do try to keep up.

 

[Desert Fox]

Totally true. This is why I believe the idea of a split decision to be absurd. But as I said before, it may even more absurd to think that logic has anything to do with justice in Italy.

I can see a strange twisted logic where they actually did not want Raffaele to return to Italy but seek asylum. That way they can support their positions internally yet not imprison anybody.

 

[Numbers]

Thanks, I appreciate you digging those out for me.

...
... Nencini technically confirmed that {Massei} conviction, rather than overturning Hellmann, but it might be an objection to raise at least in relation to Curatolo.

Generally it's pretty encouraging to see that the ECHR does involve itself in assessment of the evidence - or the way the evidence is assessed - at least to some extent. I think Amanda's calunnia appeal stands a decent chance of succeeding; the European court might well take a dim view of the way half a sentence from her 'memoriale' statement was used to support the dubious earlier statements, for example (in itself a kind of acknowledgment that those earlier statements alone were inadequate for a conviction).

My understanding of the ECHR approach, based on the statements they use as "boilerplate" (repeated in each judgment as applicable) is that they do not evaluate evidence per se; that is the responsibility of the domestic courts. What the ECHR states is that it evaluates whether the specifics of the use of the evidence created an unfair trial.

Thus, the way the Nencini court evaluated or failed to evaluate the evidence provided by the independent experts, Conti and Vecchiotti, may be an issue.

Technically, shouldn't it be said that CSC annulled Hellmann, and the Nencini court reached a different (opposite) conclusion from Hellmann, but without any new inculpatory evidence? The point being that the ECHR would examine the reasoning and use of evidence by the CSC and Nencini, as well as Massei, in contrast to Hellmann.

 

[Numbers]

Re: Amanda Knox convicted criminal. Numbers: Knox is indeed a convicted criminal and did jail time for it. You seem to forget she
was accused of more than murder. Do try to keep up.

Amanda Knox was convicted of calunnia and served her sentence, based on the Hellmann court verdict. However, once one has served the sentence, one is no longer a criminal. After all, it is the purpose of Italian law to rehabilitate or re-educate those who were convicted and served their sentence. This is also in the Italian constitution, Article 27.

 

[Kauffer]

Re: Amanda Knox convicted criminal. Numbers: Knox is indeed a convicted criminal and did jail time for it. You seem to forget she
was accused of more than murder. Do try to keep up.

I wouldn't worry about that. The conviction you are referring to will be wiped out - eventually. But it will happen.

 

[acbytesla]

I can see a strange twisted logic where they actually did not want Raffaele to return to Italy but seek asylum. That way they can support their positions internally yet not imprison anybody.

Maybe, but that makes little sense in regards to the case. There is no DNA of Amanda's in the murder room and the only evidence that places her there is the highly suspec DNA evidence implicating Raffaele. To some how confirm the conviction against Amanda and set aside Raffaele's ignores this very important aspect of the case.

 

[codyjuneau]

Just friggin apologize

.
The ISC could just suspend the verdict, apologize, and order an investigation into the handling of the case.

It would be the honourable thing to do.

Cody
.

 

[Desert Fox]

Maybe, but that makes little sense in regards to the case. There is no DNA of Amanda's in the murder room and the only evidence that places her there is the highly suspec DNA evidence implicating Raffaele. To some how confirm the conviction against Amanda and set aside Raffaele's ignores this very important aspect of the case.

I honestly expect Italy to find both of them guilty followed by arresting Raffaele and requesting to request extradition of Amanda. I hope I am right in thinking that the US will refused.

I expect in the long term, the Italian judicial system will get a serious black eye over this case.

 

[acbytesla]

.
The ISC could just suspend the verdict, apologize, and order an investigation into the handling of the case.

It would be the honourable thing to do.

Cody
.

Wishful thinking.

 

[acbytesla]

I honestly expect Italy to find both of them guilty followed by arresting Raffaele and requesting to request extradition of Amanda. I hope I am right in thinking that the US will refused.

I expect in the long term, the Italian judicial system will get a serious black eye over this case.

Sadly, I do too. This is a nightmare that is likely to continue for many more years for both of them. I'm afraid that while Raffaele is incarcerated this time that the Italian authorities will use Amanda's freedom to get Raffaele to turn against Amanda.

 

[Desert Fox]

Sadly, I do too. This is a nightmare that is likely to continue for many more years for both of them. I'm afraid that while Raffaele is incarcerated this time that the Italian authorities will use Amanda's freedom to get Raffaele to turn against Amanda.

He is a pretty strong guy. . . . I would not bet on him turning against her.
I expect the case to reach the ECHR however and there being so many violations that Italy feels like a punching bag.

While I do think they will convict, I still give a fair chance (25 to 33%) that they will kick it down the road so they do not have to see it. They want it to be somebody else's problem.

 

[Bill Williams]

Oh please....Mach is giving his opinion. He's not a doctor...was not on the jury...is not a judge.

All during high profile trials, people give their personal opinions about the mental state of the criminals. Something unusual about it?

Vibio - I have no idea if you have followed the way this developed.

Someone on the last continuation said that Mignini, at trial, tried to sexualize this crime with his remark, at his closing of the 2009 trial, that Amanda had said to Meredith just before murdering her, "We will make you have sex." This was not a comment Amanda made, Mignini said it at his closing in faux-Amanda voice.

Machiavelli was not, then, giving his "water-cooler" opinion. Machiavelli tried to correct the record. He corrected the record with this post, he summarized Mignini's actual closing which, apparently, brought in the issue of psychopathology - not just the sex-angle:

This looks like a citation from Mignini's 2009 closing arguments.
The prosecutor was slightly more articulate.
First, draws a psychological picture of Knox as nurturing a feeling of humiliation/ wounded self because of Meredith's behaviour gradually cutting her out from friendship circle, and suggests Meredith being disturbed by some of Amanda's sexual behaviours, or Amanda feeling offended by Meredith's attitude, may have plaid a role. At least the sexual theme plaid a role as an a trigger of an argument, or somehow as an instrument in Knox's "revenge":
Then Mignini draws a scenario where an argument between them degenerates, and this the context of the presence of Guede high on drugs and alcohol in a sexual ruse situation and Sollecito also high after using extensive drugs. Then draws a picture of what an instigation to sexual violence as a trigger moment could look like:
Mgnini calls Knox's behaviour: "aggressione sessuale da rivalsa" ("a sexual aggression as a revenge"), also suggested Knox may have felt Meredith as "una smorfiosetta" ("prissy").
Mignii suggests Knox may have taken advantage of her abilty to manipulate Guede and Sollecito through the sexual attraction they were both feeling for her, and thus from their "competition" to please Amanda, especially in their condition of being unchained and uninhibited due to use of drugs.
I don't believe Mignini's scenario has any meaningful difference from Nencini's reasoning about motives. Both portray a situation that has a sexual element, but the sexual context is a minor component, only a context and not itself the main motive. Both point out that "motives" are complex, different from each participants and made of multiple reasons. All judges conclude that the crime builds up gradually as an escalation, from a smaller conflict or a smaller aggression and as a degeneration of an argument.​

Incredibly, Machiavelli then went on to say that acc. to the code, such evaluations are not allowed to be taken into account by trial judges. I'll let Machiavelli repost the code's text if he wants to, because he can quote the code more accurately than I can.

What's incredible about it is Mach's later comment:

No expert psychiatrist assessed her as far as I know, I mean nobody who presented a report and a testimony.

And nobody could have ever be tasked with presenting a testimony about her possible "personality issues", because this is not a task that an expert can be given in a trial, nor that a judicial officer could be interested in.​

Sorry, one problem is you appear to be ignorant about the ABC of procedure.

But first, between us just consider that the prosecution are not psychologists or psychiatrists, they would be really amateurish if they pursued evidence of that kind, they don't have the competence to elaborate on such scenarios. They are not able even to see it, and they don't search for that.​

Here, even Machiavelli is implying that Mignini was "amateurish and incompetent" if they pursued this.

Machiavelli is not just giving his opinion as-if around a watercooler, he's actually providing the innocence-side with ammunition about Giuliano Mignini.

Machiavelli has also told lies about what is in either Amanda's or Raffaele's book. He cited one of them as saying that after Meredith rejected Amanda, she walked home alone. Raffaele's book says that Amanda went out drinking with Spiros, the Greek friend, and at 1 am Raffaele met the two of them at the piazza, and Raffaele walked her home.

Machiavelli just invents things.

 

[carbonjam72]

Totally true. This is why I believe the idea of a split decision to be absurd. But as I said before, it may even more absurd to think that logic has anything to do with justice in Italy.

I'm not in favor of going completely cynical, and saying that they are all mad buffoons (although there are a few).

I'd rather try to view this as 'inside baseball' to some degree, and a cascade of errors, with a few bad players driving the train.

I think the conflict with Burlesconi absolutely played a role in the rejection of Hellman's acquittal, based on judge Hellman saying it did. Hellman said, as soon as it became political, he knew the acquittal would get overturned.

I blame Girlanda for that. And I doubt Girlanda would do that on his own. I find it very curious that Burlesconi was finally acquitted by cassation last week (you could sense the cessation of hostilities), and Girlanda's party was put under investigation (including Girlanda), and Girlanda's boss resigned.

Rudy Guede got another 1.5 years (?) on his sentence for possession of stolen property, so the murderer of Meredith will be in jail for a bit longer.

I may be way off, Bill W says I'm nuts, but I swear to god, I smell a deal. Renzi doesn't want to be put in the middle, so they cut a deal - the judiciary lets Burlesconi off as a gesture of good faith, but they keep the scalp of Girlanda's boss as the price for threatening them over this case, and they have Girlanda on a short leash if he tries to make trouble after the acquittals.

The kerchers have their daughter's killer still in jail, its something at least, and Italy doesn't have to look like a country of anti-modern medieval barbarians.

Its easier for me to believe, then the comical dysfunctional societal wide looney bin you're suggesting.

But who really knows?

Anyway, that's my guess as to what happened and why. Amanda and Raf were trapped in Mignini's witch hunt, because he needed a girl for his satanic orgy hoax that he had been perpetuating in the Narducci trail, a distraction from his own criminal case, and a misdirection for his failure to prosecute Guede for his earlier crimes.

I could go on. Ok, I will. The judiciary was protecting the MOF convictions of Vanni and Lotti, without affirming the Giuttari/Mignini Monster/MOF satanic sect hoax, and they slowly freed Amanda and Raf after they obligingly spent four years in prison. While the judiciary eased Mignini out of his prosecutor's role, and can't cause anymore trouble in his new role.

Girlanda tries to use the case against the judiciary as part of the battle between the judiciary and Burlesconi's party. And now that battle has subsided, so the full weight of the Italian state TV and media is pumping out non-stop favorable coverage of Raffaele (neutral to Amanda), and discrediting the case against them.

I smell a deal. I see an acquittal coming. Best I can do. So, they're not crazy, just not drawing conclusions based on the evidence, justice is not as big a priority as self-preservation. They're doing the best they can, while living in a moderately corrupt society in the heart of modern europe.

 

[lonepinealex]

He is a pretty strong guy. . . . I would not bet on him turning against her.I expect the case to reach the ECHR however and there being so many violations that Italy feels like a punching bag.

While I do think they will convict, I still give a fair chance (25 to 33%) that they will kick it down the road so they do not have to see it. They want it to be somebody else's problem.

Wut. He already has - as much as he can without exposing himself to accusations of lying. I don't blame him - it's the only strategy he could persue aside from martyrdom, which is for mugs.

 

[Numbers]

Maybe, but that makes little sense in regards to the case. There is no DNA of Amanda's in the murder room and the only evidence that places her there is the highly suspec DNA evidence implicating Raffaele. To some how confirm the conviction against Amanda and set aside Raffaele's ignores this very important aspect of the case.

Of course, it would not make sense. What part of this case, with the possible exception of the Hellmann court acquittal, does make sense?

 

[carbonjam72]

.
The ISC could just suspend the verdict, apologize, and order an investigation into the handling of the case.

It would be the honourable thing to do.

Cody
.

They can't apologize because they confirmed the conviction of Amanda for lying. In their book, amanda has to be at fault. Not necessarily for murder, but they can't seem to admit error. Kind of childish really.

 

[Antony]

Maybe, but that makes little sense in regards to the case. There is no DNA of Amanda's in the murder room and the only evidence that places her there is the highly suspec DNA evidence implicating Raffaele. To some how confirm the conviction against Amanda and set aside Raffaele's ignores this very important aspect of the case.

That's all clear-cut and true, but after the 2013 ISC decision and the Nencini trial, we know that they operate on expediency and favour, rather than logic and justice - which really weren't considerations in 2013 and won't necessarily be in play now.

The Mignini faction within the judiciary have shown a single-minded determination to pin the crime on Amanda, yet they know they have little chance of getting her back in their clutches. At the same time, it's bad PR within Italy to lock up a young Italian who was never their target (except as a lever against her).

Of course, I have no handle on whether this ISC panel is in thrall to Mignini or not.

 

[Desert Fox]

Of course, it would not make sense. What part of this case, with the possible exception of the Hellmann court acquittal, does make sense?

This case is one of only three or four cases where they have the real perpetrator yet still go after their original suspects. Usually, I think they dust them off and state "oops, sorry."

The ones I am thinking of it
This one
Norfolk Four
David Camm (Second trial and after)
and I believe there is one other

 

[Desert Fox]

Wut. He already has - as much as he can without exposing himself to accusations of lying. I don't blame him - it's the only strategy he could persue aside from martyrdom, which is for mugs.

I would call what he did as tactical not really turning on her.
Technically though, they have better evidence against him than her.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm not in favor of going completely cynical, and saying that they are all mad buffoons (although there are a few).

I'd rather try to view this as 'inside baseball' to some degree, and a cascade of errors, with a few bad players driving the train.

I think the conflict with Burlesconi absolutely played a role in the rejection of Hellman's acquittal, based on judge Hellman saying it did. Hellman said, as soon as it became political, he knew the acquittal would get overturned.

I blame Girlanda for that. And I doubt Girlanda would do that on his own. I find it very curious that Burlesconi was finally acquitted by cassation last week (you could sense the cessation of hostilities), and Girlanda's party was put under investigation (including Girlanda), and Girlanda's boss resigned.

Rudy Guede got another 1.5 years (?) on his sentence for possession of stolen property, so the murderer of Meredith will be in jail for a bit longer.

I may be way off, Bill W says I'm nuts, but I swear to god, I smell a deal. Renzi doesn't want to be put in the middle, so they cut a deal - the judiciary lets Burlesconi off as a gesture of good faith, but they keep the scalp of Girlanda's boss as the price for threatening them over this case, and they have Girlanda on a short leash if he tries to make trouble after the acquittals.

The kerchers have their daughter's killer still in jail, its something at least, and Italy doesn't have to look like a country of anti-modern medieval barbarians.

Its easier for me to believe, then the comical dysfunctional societal wide looney bin you're suggesting.

But who really knows?

Anyway, that's my guess as to what happened and why. Amanda and Raf were trapped in Mignini's witch hunt, because he needed a girl for his satanic orgy hoax that he had been perpetuating in the Narducci trail, a distraction from his own criminal case, and a misdirection for his failure to prosecute Guede for his earlier crimes.

I could go on. Ok, I will. The judiciary was protecting the MOF convictions of Vanni and Lotti, without affirming the Giuttari/Mignini Monster/MOF satanic sect hoax, and they slowly freed Amanda and Raf after they obligingly spent four years in prison. While the judiciary eased Mignini out of his prosecutor's role, and can't cause anymore trouble in his new role.

Girlanda tries to use the case against the judiciary as part of the battle between the judiciary and Burlesconi's party. And now that battle has subsided, so the full weight of the Italian state TV and media is pumping out non-stop favorable coverage of Raffaele (neutral to Amanda), and discrediting the case against them.

I smell a deal. I see an acquittal coming. Best I can do. So, they're not crazy, just not drawing conclusions based on the evidence, justice is not as big a priority as self-preservation. They're doing the best they can, while living in a moderately corrupt society in the heart of modern europe.

I'm not actually saying it's a nation wide looney bin at all. Just that logic seems to have little to do with how justice operates in Italy. I was shocked when the acquittals were annulled. This case is a disaster from any pr perspective so why would they keep it alive? The opportunity was perfect for putting this mess away and they declined to do that.

Perhaps I just don't understand the political elements at play in Italy.