Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[anglolawyer]

The Daily Mail reports:

However, it has now been revealed Knox's lawyers have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in a last ditch attempt to stop the final ratification of her conviction for murder.
They have asked for the case to be suspended, pending the acceptance of her appeal to the European Court against a conviction for slander.

I already suggested that about a year ago. If the ECHR upheld her application that her calumny conviction was unfair then it could not be used to buttress the murder charge and would also mean, probably, that the whole process was fatally tainted by unfairness.

 

[NancyS]

What you don't seem to understand, I don't have any poop theories, it's the PIP's that seem to. Amanda didn't smell it, she has never said she did, she does say she saw it though, and from where she pointed out that she saw it, it is not possible, now if any PIP's want to explain that, then it is their theory. This is exactly why trying to reason with almost anyone on here is not possible, they can only see thing through Amanda's innocent eyes.

This is what is utter madness - how on earth can you know exactly where Amansa would need to stand to see the poo? And I doubt whether Amanda would be able to remember exactly where she was standing either, especially years later! Getting fixated on this kind of nonsense and thinking this is evidence of anything, is just very bizarre

 

[Kaosium]

What you don't seem to understand, I don't have any poop theories, it's the PIP's that seem to. Amanda didn't smell it, she has never said she did, she does say she saw it though, and from where she pointed out that she saw it, it is not possible, now if any PIP's want to explain that, then it is their theory. This is exactly why trying to reason with almost anyone on here is not possible, they can only see thing through Amanda's innocent eyes.

Your claim was that Amanda being aware of the dump in the toilet is either proof or evidence that she was involved as otherwise you cannot find it believable that she would have noticed? Is that a fair assessment of your position?

That claim, and your inability to understand why innocentisti don't take it seriously is just a reminder that you're a victim in this case as well, which goes for all the guilters actually. Not as much as some because you've not spent as much time on the case or taken as extreme a position, but anyone who dismisses ex-FBI agents and forensic scientists of the caliber of Bruce Budowle and Peter Gill but thinks the utter crap they dream up has validity as evidence have had their cognitive abilities damaged by this case.

 

[Numbers]

The Daily Mail reports:

However, it has now been revealed Knox's lawyers have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in a last ditch attempt to stop the final ratification of her conviction for murder.
They have asked for the case to be suspended, pending the acceptance of her appeal to the European Court against a conviction for slander.

I already suggested that about a year ago. If the ECHR upheld her application that her calumny conviction was unfair then it could not be used to buttress the murder charge and would also mean, probably, that the whole process was fatally tainted by unfairness.

That is quite interesting. The DM language is not fully clear, I assume the lawyers are asking the CSC to delay a decision until the ECHR moves on the application relating to calunnia.

 

[LondonJohn]

The Daily Mail reports:

However, it has now been revealed Knox's lawyers have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in a last ditch attempt to stop the final ratification of her conviction for murder.
They have asked for the case to be suspended, pending the acceptance of her appeal to the European Court against a conviction for slander.

I already suggested that about a year ago. If the ECHR upheld her application that her calumny conviction was unfair then it could not be used to buttress the murder charge and would also mean, probably, that the whole process was fatally tainted by unfairness.

Verrrrrrrry interesting indeed.

Did this request (from Dalla Vedova?) came in the Knox defence arguments before the SC today? Or in a written submission? The article leaves it very unclear.

And is it fair to say that if this request has been made, then does that in turn suggest that Knox's legal team might have received some level of indication from the ECHR regarding the admissibility of the application?

 

[Kaosium]

The Daily Mail reports:

However, it has now been revealed Knox's lawyers have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in a last ditch attempt to stop the final ratification of her conviction for murder.
They have asked for the case to be suspended, pending the acceptance of her appeal to the European Court against a conviction for slander.

I already suggested that about a year ago. If the ECHR upheld her application that her calumny conviction was unfair then it could not be used to buttress the murder charge and would also mean, probably, that the whole process was fatally tainted by unfairness.

Do you have a link? I cannot quite understand what that excerpt means. Are they asking the ECHR to intervene, or the ISC to delay judgement until there's a judgement on that by the ECHR?

Would this be a positive sign for the likelihood of the acceptance of that case by the ECHR?

 

[lonepinealex]

That is quite interesting. The DM language is not fully clear, I assume the lawyers are asking the CSC to delay a decision until the ECHR moves on the application relating to calunnia.

That's how I read it. Interesting move.

 

[LondonJohn]

Do you have a link? I cannot quite understand what that excerpt means. Are they asking the ECHR to intervene, or the ISC to delay judgement until there's a judgement on that by the ECHR?

Would this be a positive sign for the likelihood of the acceptance of that case by the ECHR?

Stop repeating everything I say

Here's the article in which it's mentioned:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...duo-s-murder-conviction-Meredith-Kercher.html

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

This is what is utter madness - how on earth can you know exactly where Amansa would need to stand to see the poo? And I doubt whether Amanda would be able to remember exactly where she was standing either, especially years later! Getting fixated on this kind of nonsense and thinking this is evidence of anything, is just very bizarre

What you do not seem to understand, is she pointed out exactly where she was standing to the Prosecutor when asked before her first trial, a picture was taken from that same spot, and guess what, you can't even come close to seeing it, not to mention, the person taking the picture was probably quite a bit taller than Amanda's 5 foot, 4 inch stature.

 

[lonepinealex]

What you do not seem to understand, is she pointed out exactly where she was standing to the Prosecutor when asked before her first trial, a picture was taken from that same spot, and guess what, you can't even come close to seeing it, not to mention, the person taking the picture was probably quite a bit taller than Amanda's 5 foot, 4 inch stature.

Good grief. Is this it for your argument?


...I had just typed out a list of counter-arguments but it's all so stupid that I can't even. Deleted 'em. Life's too short.

 

[Bill Williams]

What you do not seem to understand, is she pointed out exactly where she was standing to the Prosecutor when asked before her first trial, a picture was taken from that same spot, and guess what, you can't even come close to seeing it, not to mention, the person taking the picture was probably quite a bit taller than Amanda's 5 foot, 4 inch stature.

This is your case? Ok, I asked for evidence..... and you gave it. Thanks for that at least. You are now head and shoulders above many.

 

[Diocletus]

That is quite interesting. The DM language is not fully clear, I assume the lawyers are asking the CSC to delay a decision until the ECHR moves on the application relating to calunnia.

Sounds to me like they might have applied for Interim Measures directly to the echr, but you're right, it isn't clear.

 

[NancyS]

What you do not seem to understand, is she pointed out exactly where she was standing to the Prosecutor when asked before her first trial, a picture was taken from that same spot, and guess what, you can't even come close to seeing it, not to mention, the person taking the picture was probably quite a bit taller than Amanda's 5 foot, 4 inch stature.

You ignore the scientists and experts and this is your argument - are you going to argue that you can always remember exactly where you were standing when you smell your dogs poop? Do you mark the spot? Has your dog done a poop in Perugia so that you can test out your poop theory? Thanks for the laugh though

 

[codyjuneau]

Italy should get written up for that, too, just like it got written up by the Committee on Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment for 1) not providing suspects with lawyers, and 2) not investigating police assaults on people who only suffer injuries healable within 20 days.

.
She should also have been examined by a doctor.

Cuffs to the back of the head are essentially rabbit punches and can cause severe injury. That is why they are outlawed in virtually all combat sports:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_punch

Cody
.

 

[Kauffer]

The Daily Mail reports:

However, it has now been revealed Knox's lawyers have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in a last ditch attempt to stop the final ratification of her conviction for murder.
They have asked for the case to be suspended, pending the acceptance of her appeal to the European Court against a conviction for slander.

I already suggested that about a year ago. If the ECHR upheld her application that her calumny conviction was unfair then it could not be used to buttress the murder charge and would also mean, probably, that the whole process was fatally tainted by unfairness.

Wtf!!! This is a major development if it's true.

And Anglo - your reasoning is sound. A fair few of us have argued this.

 

[Dan O.]

What you don't seem to understand, I don't have any poop theories, it's the PIP's that seem to. Amanda didn't smell it, she has never said she did, she does say she saw it though, and from where she pointed out that she saw it, it is not possible, now if any PIP's want to explain that, then it is their theory. This is exactly why trying to reason with almost anyone on here is not possible, they can only see thing through Amanda's innocent eyes.

Yes, toy do have a theory on the poop. But you are only presenting your conclusion and not permitting an evaluation of the evidence. We have as a fact that Amanda knew of the existence of the poo. We have Amanda's earliest statements attesting to the existence of the poo which we see in her email home and presume that this is a recap of what she had been telling the police. In that statement, Amanda says:

After I got dressed I went to the other bathroom in my house, the one that Filomena and Laura use, and used their hairdryer to obviously dry my hair and it was after I was putting back the dryer that I noticed the **** that was left in the toilet, something that definitely no one in out house would do.​

A key word in that statement is "noticed". Amanda doesn't say she saw the **** in the toilet. From where the hair driers were kept on the counter just outside the door, there wouldn't be anything visible. I even showed with photos that at normal eye height from in front of the sink it is not visible. But a little higher or a little closer and Rudy's **** is in full view. Amanda would not see the **** left in the toilet but as she moves closer to the door, her long hair freshly dried warming the suspended particles near her face, she could definitely notice the smell and move closer to investigate and see.

On the other side, how is any of this an indication of guilt?

 

[Kauffer]

ECHR

More from the Mail:

Suggests this has been confirmed by Dalla Vedova.

"As the slander is considered circumstantial evidence in her murder trial, her legal team asked for the murder trial to be suspended, Knox defence lawyer Carlo Della Vedova confirmed.

But the move has left representatives of the Kercher family shocked.
The Kercher's lawyer Vieri Fabiani said: ‘If the Strasbourg court condemns the Italian Republic, what would it change? What could it usefully serve? Absolutely nothing.’"

And look at Fabiani's remarks - another Italian who just doesn't understand the significance of the whole ECHR package.

This is sounding better. But will the court agree, if asked?

So, I think Diocletus is right - this would be for 'interim measures'. What do you think, Numbers?

 

[Kaosium]

Stop repeating everything I say

Here's the article in which it's mentioned:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...duo-s-murder-conviction-Meredith-Kercher.html

Thank you for the link.

Stop thinking the same things I am and typing faster to get it posted a minute or two before I do, it's making me look bad!

 

[Dan O.]

This is what is utter madness - how on earth can you know exactly where Amansa would need to stand to see the poo? ...

Sherlock knows this only because of my dedication to finding the truth. I posted the comparison photos taken by the Spheron camera:

 

[Diocletus]

More from the Mail:

Suggests this has been confirmed by Dalla Vedova.

"As the slander is considered circumstantial evidence in her murder trial, her legal team asked for the murder trial to be suspended, Knox defence lawyer Carlo Della Vedova confirmed.

But the move has left representatives of the Kercher family shocked.
The Kercher's lawyer Vieri Fabiani said: ‘If the Strasbourg court condemns the Italian Republic, what would it change? What could it usefully serve? Absolutely nothing.’"

And look at Fabiani's remarks - another Italian who just doesn't understand the significance of the whole ECHR package.

This is sounding better. But will the court agree, if asked?

So, I think Diocletus is right - this would be for 'interim measures'. What do you think, Numbers?

Is Fabiani a real lawyer? That has to be one if the most obtuse statements I've ever heard. More kercher rubbish.

The filing makes me think that dellavadova had a bad reaction to the proceedings today. I also can't believe that the echr would grant this relief; however, if they do, the case is over.