Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[anglolawyer]

Well, this development, if it is true - may be stunning.

First of all, though, I don't trust the Daily Mail in terms of their reliability for presenting factual news. Even when they don't simply invent news, they (and other media, sometimes even responsible media) get things wrong. Also, the DM strives to put a sensational slant on what it prints.

It's possible that Amanda Knox and her lawyers have requested interim measures from ECHR. Those are orders to a State to not do something, and they have immediate effect. But they are generally (always, I thought) reserved for what ECHR considers life-and-death emergencies, such as extradition from a Council of Europe country, where supposedly one will not be tortured and/or killed, to another country where there is a real risk of such treatment. Here is an excerpt from the ECHR fact-sheet on interim measures:



So I tend to think that interim measures are not involved. Also, I would think that interim measures are announced by the ECHR, and not publicly stated as requested by one's lawyer, but that is my guess on the protocol and procedure. I have been wrong before.

My thought is that in her recent (rumored) appeal supplement, Amanda and her lawyers pointed out that she had lodged a complaint with the ECHR about the violation of her human rights by Italy with regards to the simple calunnia conviction. Since ECHR case-law is overwhelmingly in favor of Italy being found in violation (IMO, and I've a read a fair amount of ECHR case-law), Amanda and her lawyers may have suggested that the CSC delay any final decision until the ECHR acts. This act might be the communication of the case to Italy or it might be the judgment by ECHR. Such a suspension, especially until a judgment by ECHR, would lessen harm to the defendants, and certainly to Raffaele, who would probably be imprisoned if the conviction were finalized, and also to the reputation of Italy when it otherwise would be found to be in violation of multiple human rights protections of the Convention. But again, this is guessing on my part.

If the suggestion on suspension of the case to await ECHR action was in the appeal supplement, I assume that the civil lawyers and the prosecutor learned of it when they received their copies of the appeal supplement document.

If someone else has ideas or knowledge they are free to contribute, I would welcome learning more about this development.

Being deprived of your liberty surely counts as irreparable harm. You cannot get the lost time back.

 

[Kaosium]

But there can't be a status: "without an ECHR ruling", because Knox has applied asking for an ECHR judgement.

So there will be a ruling, at least about its manifest amissiblity vs. inadmissibility, and the ruling would either determine that there was a violation, or that there wasn't a violation.

In the hypothetical event that an ECHR ruling finds Italy at fault for a violation against Knox, we sould see in what the violation consists; in that event Italian courts would determine if, or how, such alleged violation may affect the merits of a trial (most violations don't cause a change in trial outcomes).

That's an interesting point, but again the standard isn't even the ECHR, it's the fact the US government cannot (legally) abridge Amanda Knox's constitutional rights. A judgement against Italy in the ECHR would make it a slam dunk, but even if the ECHR fails to act Amanda will get her day in court and will no doubt contest the fairness of the trial which State, acting on behalf of Italy, will have to prove was constitutional.

All the people involved in treaties with the US know (or damn well ought to) that in the US government power is beneath the Constitution. Government does not grant rights, (and can thus revoke them when convenient) the Constitution restrains government. It doesn't matter if you or anyone else likes that or can think of reasons it's silly, it's not going to change just so Italy can stick it to Amanda Knox. As for why that is, I'd have to refer you to the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.

The Anti-Federalists won on this one, which is why we have the Bill of Rights which are not privileges but restrictions on the power of government.

 

[RWVBWL]

I read this earlier today,
does anyone know where a link to it is at so I may read it?


Feb 18, 2014
A recording of Knox being interrogated in Italian prison is released for the first time.

Link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/11493787/amanda-knox-trial-face-of-an-angel.html


I still wonder why Amanda nor Raff never turned on "poor" Rudy Guede
and just blamed it all on the real black guy?

 

[Kaosium]

Add to your list the fact that she never mentioned Patrick (source: Mignini's cross exam at the Massei trial) but that she mentioned him by name and said she was thinking of quitting her job in a bugged telephone call (source: 52 pages of translated phone intercepts recently put up on FB by MichaelB) thus making him a person of interest who she had suspiciously omitted despite being asked over and over for names of guys.

Ah, I didn't know the last part, I thought she'd told them that Patrick had met with Meredith and he was thinking about hiring her as a barmaid. If that came out some other way then I can see why ILE may have been suspicious of them, especially when they had the means to know that 'Unknown Male #2' was likely of African decent due to the DNA Rudy left.

 

[anglolawyer]

I read this earlier today,
does anyone know where a link to it is at so I may read it?


Feb 18, 2014
A recording of Knox being interrogated in Italian prison is released for the first time.

Link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/11493787/amanda-knox-trial-face-of-an-angel.html


I still wonder why Amanda nor Raff never turned on "poor" Rudy Guede
and just blamed it all on the real black guy?

Nor why they never turned on each other when the possibilities, especially for Raffaele, were so promising.

 

[Samzilla]

Welcome, Samzilla.

The situation in the Knox-Sollecito trial regarding luminol is basically this:

1. Six weeks after the initial forensic investigation and after they closed the crime scene and left it like (the photos at left are how it was when the murder was discovered, the ones at right how it looked when they laid the luminol) the police didn't have any real evidence against Amanda and Raffaele and went back to the scene looking for some. They laid luminol in the hallway, Filomena's room and Amanda's room and did TMB tests which were negative.

2. Writing up her forensic report, the RTIGF, Patrizia Stefanoni included the luminol positives but omitted the TMB negatives.

3. When in court and asked about a luminol hit and whether they did any more tests she replied something to the effect of 'we only laid luminol there.'

4. Late in the trial the prosecution was ordered to reveal documents they had not given the defense, in there were the results of the TMB tests on the luminol hits that were negative and they'd omitted from the RTIGF and lied about in court.



TMB is not a confirmatory test, none of those were done on the luminol hits, or if they were they were never revealed. TMB is a very sensitive blood test and had it been blood, they would have gotten a positive reaction. The prosecution, when caught out, tried to pretend that the blood must have been diluted to between the sensitivity thresholds of luminol and TMB which is a lot stupider than it sounds as it would require a uniform dilution in three disparate locations and there's no reason to think diluted blood was related to the murder anyway.

thanks or the response!

 

[Numbers]

Being deprived of your liberty surely counts as irreparable harm. You cannot get the lost time back.

ECHR claims it rarely intervenes in Article 6 (fair trial) or Article 8 (privacy, family rights, e.g. child separated from one parent) cases in its Interim Measures fact-sheet. It claims it won't use interim measures simply to keep or get someone out of prison. There was one case, from Spain, where an order, not an Interim Measure, was used to free a woman imprisoned for terrorist activity, whose sentence had been extended unfairly.

Here's a link to a site with PDFs explaining interim measures:
http://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=applicants&c=#n1365511916164_pointer

Rule 39 of the Rules of Court reads as follows:
Article 39 – Interim measures
“1. The Chamber or, where appropriate, its President may, at the request of a party or of any other person concerned, or of its own motion, indicate to the parties any interim measure which it considers should be adopted in the interests of the parties or of the proper conduct of the proceedings before it.
2. Where it is considered appropriate, immediate notice of the measure adopted in a particular case may be given to the Committee of Ministers.
3. The Chamber may request information from the parties on any matter connected with the implementation of any interim measure it has indicated.”

Scope of interim measures

In practice, interim measures are applied only in a limited number of areas and most concern expulsion and extradition. They usually consist in a suspension of the applicant’s expulsion or extradition for as long as the application is being examined.

The most typical cases are those where, if the expulsion or extradition takes place, the applicants would fear for their lives (thus engaging Article 2 of the Convention) or would face ill-treatment prohibited by Article 3 (prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment). More exceptionally, such measures may be indicated in response to certain requests concerning the right to a fair hearing (Article 6 § 1) and the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8).

In the Court’s case-law as it currently stands, Rule 39 is not applied in the following cases: to prevent the imminent demolition of property, imminent insolvency, the enforcement of an obligation to do military service, to obtain the release of an applicant who is in prison pending the Court’s decision as to the fairness of the proceedings, to ensure the holding of a referendum, or to prevent the dissolution of a political party.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi Machiavelli,
Thanks for the info about PM Mignini never personally charging Amanda's Family for defamation. I learn something new most every day about this murder case we discuss...


Now about this:

Well in fact even Knox herself hints to the episode in her book, even if she paints her loneliness in soft distant colours <snip>
She calls Raffaele at 1am and she is glad Raffaele walks her home - she has no girl friend who does - she is glad, despite they had not been eager to spend the evening together. She was not so glad to spend the evening with him and apparently he too - so he says - preferred to remain closed at home rather than go out to party with Amanda on Halloween night.
Even from their own book, you bet she wanted to spend the night with Meredith.
<snip>
Even Sollecito notes that she wanted to spend the night with Meredith.
The fact that even he knows Meredith didn't respond to her sms,

Dang,
readin' this the other day,
man it almost seems like Amanda was sad and lonely on Halloween,
especially because Amanda had no girlfriends to walk her home after she was out drinkin'...


I did not see Amanda on Halloween, neither did you I bet, right?

Lets see what Patrick "Diya" Lumumba says:
The next day Amanda attended a Hallowe'en party at the club, knocking back the free red wine. "She was all over two American boys," Patrick says. "There was no sign of Sollecito and I didn't see her leave."


Link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Lumumba-reveals-framed-Merediths-murder.html


Gosh,
it sounds like "Diya" is describing a gal alone pouting, err having fun because her only English gal pal won't text her back. Hopefully she was on the dance floor too!!!

Hey Machiavelli,
I kinda bet she was glad to see her new boy-friend,
(who wanted to work on his college thesis just a coupla weeks before he was due to graduate instead of hangin' around with them English girlz), after tossing back that free wine that her boss gave her...

I bet that they kissed too when Raff met up with her and took her to his home,
wouldn't you have?

What a bummer Meredith never texted her back,
for I bet Amanda would have rather luved hangin' out with her + the English girlz until 5:30 in the morning, gettin' more +more drunk, instead of cuddlin' in the arms of her new "Harry Potter" look-alike boy-friend.
Right...

 

[Numbers]

State can determine that Italy violated her rights without a ruling from the ECHR. There's basically no chance of an extradition with an ECHR ruling against Italy regarding this case.

But there can't be a status: "without an ECHR ruling", because Knox has applied asking for an ECHR judgement. So there will be a ruling, at least about its manifest amissiblity vs. inadmissibility, and the ruling would either determine that there was a violation, or that there wasn't a violation.

In the hypothetical event that an ECHR ruling finds Italy at fault for a violation against Knox, we sould see in what the violation consists; in that event Italian courts would determine if, or how, such alleged violation may affect the merits of a trial (most violations don't cause a change in trial outcomes).

That's an interesting point, but again the standard isn't even the ECHR, it's the fact the US government cannot (legally) abridge Amanda Knox's constitutional rights. A judgement against Italy in the ECHR would make it a slam dunk, but even if the ECHR fails to act Amanda will get her day in court and will no doubt contest the fairness of the trial which State, acting on behalf of Italy, will have to prove was constitutional.

All the people involved in treaties with the US know (or damn well ought to) that in the US government power is beneath the Constitution. Government does not grant rights, (and can thus revoke them when convenient) the Constitution restrains government. It doesn't matter if you or anyone else likes that or can think of reasons it's silly, it's not going to change just so Italy can stick it to Amanda Knox. As for why that is, I'd have to refer you to the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.

The Anti-Federalists won on this one, which is why we have the Bill of Rights which are not privileges but restrictions on the power of government.

{highlighting added to quote.}

Not sure what your trying to say in the text I highlighted. It's extremely unlikely that the US Dept. of State would agree to extradite someone (a) believed to be actually innocent and (b) whose rights were known to have been violated to obtain a wrongful conviction. As explained by Kaosium, the the US government - the Executive - must obey the US Constitution in this situation.

 

[RWVBWL]

Ah, I didn't know the last part, I thought she'd told them that Patrick had met with Meredith and he was thinking about hiring her as a barmaid. If that came out some other way then I can see why ILE may have been suspicious of them, especially when they had the means to know that 'Unknown Male #2' was likely of African decent due to the DNA Rudy left.

You know,
re-reading this old story from Nov. 2007,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Lumumba-reveals-framed-Merediths-murder.html
it's odd how Patrick Lumumba thought this:
"She tried to play the race card.
She thought that by pointing the finger at a black person she'd distract attention from herself.


Ah, err, Patrick,
sorry your bar was kept closed by the police after you were released and everything, BUT Amanda was not trying to protect herself when she was asked about + then named you that night, she was trying to protect "poor Rudy", the real black man!

It's kinda sad to see Lumumba show up at every court date.
What's he looking for, tj4MK, or some $$$$.$$?

 

[Sonia]

I read this earlier today,
does anyone know where a link to it is at so I may read it?


Feb 18, 2014
A recording of Knox being interrogated in Italian prison is released for the first time.

Link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/11493787/amanda-knox-trial-face-of-an-angel.html

Here's the Feb 2014 article referred to, I believe:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-released-Amanda-Knox-interrogation-tape.html

This Feb 2014 press release was a bit of publicity for the release of Vogt's sloppy, biased BBC documentary at about that time. The Dec 2007 recording in the clip is part of the documentary.

I still wonder why Amanda nor Raff never turned on "poor" Rudy Guede
and just blamed it all on the real black guy?

wtf???

Raffaele never met Guede. How could he turn on someone he never met?

Amanda, who met Rudy once because he knew the boys downstairs, had no idea he had slaughtered her friend because she was not there.

As she explained in the clip from Vogt's lame doc, Knox was pressured to name Patrick by her interrogators. Her naming Patrick instead of Guede strongly suggests she was not there and had no idea who actually killed her friend.

 

[Kaosium]

You know,
re-reading this old story from Nov. 2007,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Lumumba-reveals-framed-Merediths-murder.html
it's odd how Patrick Lumumba thought this:
"She tried to play the race card.
She thought that by pointing the finger at a black person she'd distract attention from herself.


Ah, err, Patrick,
sorry your bar was kept closed by the police after you were released and everything, BUT Amanda was not trying to protect herself when she was asked about + then named you that night, she was trying to protect "poor Rudy", the real black man!

It's kinda sad to see Lumumba show up at every court date.
What's he looking for, tj4MK, or some $$$$.$$?

Heh, good point, obviously Patrick never thought that all the way through.

 

[RWVBWL]

Forensic Officers use cocaine?

Hi Machiavelli, Vibio and any other Italian speakin' pro-guilters:
Can you grab a copy of the original Crime Scene video's and tell me,
is this true?

Questions about the professionalism of forensic officers in the case have emerged after they were heard joking on a crime scene video about taking cocaine to stay awake.

The tape was shown to the court during the appeal and at the original trial but with no audio
– until it was played on Italian TV.

Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ress-says-Patrick-Lumumba-accused-murder.html


Golly,
I wonder who was up late those nights working, collecting forensic evidence?
Hmmmm, I seem to recall Coughing Boy workin' there very early in the morning,
same with Dr. Stefanoni, she was seen holding the bloody bra up that Meredith wore, in her gloved right hand, instead of using new, clean sterile tweezers at what time is it, oh, it's 1:22:34am.

It's not these 2 jokin' around on video talkin' about using cocaine that The Daily Mail article I linked above mentions, is it?

 

[RWVBWL]

It simply amazing to hear, err read about what the Forensic Officers are discussing on the Crime Scene videos!

In 1 clip,
Dr. Stefanoni is telling her lab assistant Alessi back in Rome to test the seminal fluid.
Too bad we never got to see those results,!!!

And The Daily Mail reports that Forensic Officers joke,
(or are they?) about using cocaine to stay awake as they work on Meredith Kercher's murder and rape..

I wonder what else is on the audio of the Crime Scene tapes?

 

[RWVBWL]

Thanks for the video link Sonia!

Man,
Amanda is scared, you can tell it in her voice,
and the Mafia busting cops are not even yelling at her when she is interrogated in this video!

Link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-released-Amanda-Knox-interrogation-tape.html

 

[RWVBWL]

Ah, probably my last post tonight,
found on IIP, courtesy of Teddy:
From Retired Judge Hellmann, today,
who set Amanda and [SIZE="-7"]Raffaelle[/SIZE] free back in 2011:
Judge Hellmann talking to the newspaper La Nazione:
http://postimg.org/image/raag3hq07/

Hellmann: If they were to confirm the conviction… it will be a terrible miscarriage of justice. There is no proof against those two youths. Each person must assume their own responsibilities.
Q: How much flexibility does the Supreme Court have?
Hellmann : The outcome is quite predictable, and that is the rejection of the appeals and the confirmation of the convictions. What do you want, that the Supreme Court will now eat its own words?
Q: You decided for acquittal based on science and conscience…
Hellmann : We took a decision based on conscience, but I will be curious to see what they say now. Two years ago the Supreme Court criticized us claiming that we had carried out a piecemeal analysis of the evidence, instead of carrying out a comprehensive evaluation. But, I ask myself, if the single pieces of evidence have no value, how was it possible to perform a comprehensive evaluation of nothing?
Q: If they condemn them, will justice not have been done?
Hellmann: I feel sorry for those two poor kids that have nothing to do with this.


ETA - As I'm drinkin' some of Admiral Nelson's Premimum Spiced Rum at the moment,
I gotta shout out that I'm glad Raffaele Sollecito is still free, right now!
And I hope that Raffaele and Amanda are forever free from this Injustice in Perugia!!!
Now, if only this darn mosquito would stop botherin' me...

 

[Antony]

It's only here that ECHR "precedents" carry weight. I can't count the posts that have ensured beyond any doubt Italy committed civil rights offenses against AK.

I don't believe any of them. First, I doubt that non lawyers cherrypicking ECHR judgements truly understand the law or how it is applied. Second, I believe that the calunnia conviction is pretty airtight.

Hopes that AK was provoked into a wild false accusation seem silly to me, as do her claims of physical abuse since she never filed a suit. Given her repeated, voluntary statements confirming her false accusation, I doubt the ECHR will even give it a second look.

Your views are simply deluded. The violations are too many to count in this case. Here's a paraphrase of what went on in court:

Prosecutors - Our results are valid unless you can prove contamination.

Judge - that's right.

Defence - Give us the instrument readings so that we can demonstrate it.

Prosecutors - you can't have them.

Judge - that's right.

That's enough for the ECtHR to find the trial in violation on its own. If you think it isn't, then your opinion isn't worth very much here.

 

[Planigale]

Welcome, Samzilla.

The situation in the Knox-Sollecito trial regarding luminol is basically this:

1. Six weeks after the initial forensic investigation and after they closed the crime scene and left it like this (the photos at left are how it was when the murder was discovered, the ones at right how it looked when they laid the luminol) the police didn't have any real evidence against Amanda and Raffaele and went back to the scene looking for some. They laid luminol in the hallway, Filomena's room and Amanda's room and did TMB tests which were negative.

2. Writing up her forensic report, the RTIGF, Patrizia Stefanoni included the luminol positives but omitted the TMB negatives.

3. When in court and asked about a luminol hit and whether they did any more tests she replied something to the effect of 'we only laid luminol there.'

4. Late in the trial the prosecution was ordered to reveal documents they had not given the defense, in there were the results of the TMB tests on the luminol hits that were negative and they'd omitted from the RTIGF and lied about in court.



TMB is not a confirmatory test, none of those were done on the luminol hits, or if they were they were never revealed. TMB is a very sensitive blood test and had it been blood, they would have gotten a positive reaction. The prosecution, when caught out, tried to pretend that the blood must have been diluted to between the sensitivity thresholds of luminol and TMB which is a lot stupider than it sounds as it would require a uniform dilution in three disparate locations and there's no reason to think diluted blood was related to the murder anyway.

This is very highly diluted, about 1 drop of blood in 20 litres water. Certainly not visible blood. I have not done the experiment but it would I suspect be compatible for instance with Knox standing on the bath mat with damp feet and then walking down the corridor. It could be dilute rust or iron rich soil. Possibly even a cleaning product previously used on a floor or the shower. Lots of possibilities. The one thing it could not be is the consequence of standing in a pool of undiluted blood.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hey Giulia Bongiorno Esq.

Can someone please ask Raffaele's attorney Giulia Bongiorno Esq.
to point out in the Crime Scene video + show this to the Italian Supreme Court that Dr. Stefanoni wanted the seminal fluid tested on Nov. 3rd, of 2007, the very next day after Miss Kercher was found raped and murdered?

Where are the results, Dr. Stefanoni?

I betcha that the seminal fluid is not from Raffaele!!?


Can they also ask Giulia Bongiorno, Esq.
to play the snippet where the Forensic Officers mention using cocaine as they work?
Surely someone knows where it is at in the Crime Scene video's, right???


Can someone also ask Giulia Bongiorno, Esq.
to show the Court the Crime Scene video clip where Dr. Stefanoni is wearing dirty gloves as she handles that bra clasp and the Forensic Officers pass it around like a spinello?

Thanks,
RW

 

[anglolawyer]

ECHR claims it rarely intervenes in Article 6 (fair trial) or Article 8 (privacy, family rights, e.g. child separated from one parent) cases in its Interim Measures fact-sheet. It claims it won't use interim measures simply to keep or get someone out of prison. There was one case, from Spain, where an order, not an Interim Measure, was used to free a woman imprisoned for terrorist activity, whose sentence had been extended unfairly.

Here's a link to a site with PDFs explaining interim measures:
http://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=applicants&c=#n1365511916164_pointer

OK then, how about this - being convicted of murder based on evidence tainted by illegality? Surely that is irreparable (aside from appeals, compensation etc which can repair everything except death so that 'irreparable' must have some special meaning).