Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Chris_Halkides]

Bongiorno on Knox's interrogation

Bongiorno said she believed Knox's statement was coerced — but that even if the high court chooses to consider it, Sollecito figures nowhere in her story.

"My heart is crying because I think she was pressured by an intermediary," Bongiorno said, apparently referring to the person who served as Knox's unofficial translator during police questioning. But within that statement, Bongiorno added, Knox "rules out Sollecito." link

 

[acbytesla]

.
Does anybody know of some venue where we could arrange to legally bet on the outcome of the ECHR judgments? One where the money is held in trust, and paid out by an independent source so that the bettor cannot weasel out of the bet.

I would relish winning some easy money from the guilters. I would also like to see how many guilters are willing to put their money where their mouths are, rather than other peoples lives where their mouths are. I suspect it would be very few, if any.

Cody
..

Well, I wouldn't bet on it either way. I'm amazed given the strange decisions made previously that any one would want to bet on it. But, I guess I am not a gambler at heart. I like to think I have minimized the risk of losing and I don't see how anyone could do this on this case.

 

[Numbers]

C'mon man. Numbers has made his claim that Amanda Knox's rights were violated, and that the ECHR will view it this way. He's stated numerous case law that supports his assertion.

It's your claim that the ECHR may not view it this way, but have not cited anything. Somehow this is also Numbers' job? That's not how it works. If you don't have the time, you could probably hire someone on fiverr to do it for you.

In a trial that I was at, for sentencing, for hours it was first the defense reading case law of similar crimes given a lenient sentence. Then it was the prosecutor reading case law of similar crimes given a harsh sentence. It was then up to the judge to decide.

In this instance, if Numbers is the defense, he's done a thorough job of making his point. As an interested observer, I've noticed the prosecution has done nothing to make theirs.

Welcome to the forum, Samzilla.

You've perhaps noticed that the guilters generally have either nothing concrete to say or simply spew misstatements.

 

[Wattson]

Numbers has made his claim that Amanda Knox's rights were violated, and that the ECHR will view it this way. He's stated numerous case law that supports his assertion.

It's your claim that the ECHR may not view it this way, but have not cited anything. Somehow this is also Numbers' job? That's not how it works. If you don't have the time, you could probably hire someone on fiverr to do it for you.

In a trial that I was at, for sentencing, for hours it was first the defense reading case law of similar crimes given a lenient sentence. Then it was the prosecutor reading case law of similar crimes given a harsh sentence. It was then up to the judge to decide.

In this instance, if Numbers is the defense, he's done a thorough job of making his point. As an interested observer, I've noticed the prosecution has done nothing to make theirs.

This reminds me of another case

 

[Kauffer]

For some reason, the idea of Amanda Knox as a sexual killer has a very strong psychological attraction for some people. I can't understand why, but it's very strong, almost like a drug. What is it that makes this idea so compelling to some psyches?

Only in the last few days, Yummi has embraced the notion of Ms Knox as a revengeful lesbian, hopelessly attracted to Ms Kercher. It's very disturbing. It's a fantasy that speaks for the dark recesses of his mind but says nothing of value about Ms Knox.

But the gender bias in the case is extraordinary and draws on medieval and even earlier myths of the unseemly nature of female sexuality - Ms Knox we hear, by virtue of her young, womanly power, mesmerising the male dolts to facilitate her evil intent.

 

[Poppy1016]

Do lesbians often have boyfriends and marry men?

 

[Anode]

It must be almost over for the day. It's about 4:00pm?

 

[Samzilla]

Do lesbians often have boyfriends and marry men?

To be fair, my wife's dad is gay, haha. He was married and had kids before coming out.

 

[Poppy1016]

I don't know if I've missed it, but has a time been given for the verdict?

 

[TruthCalls]

Expert witnesses are also paid to provide opinions and their expertise. If you think that she is “corrupt” or that such opinion is a “lie” it’s up to you to prove it. You may say that, as long as you prove it. The facts are that Stefanoni told about false negatives on confirmatory tests on the luminol prints immediately in her first 2008 questioning; she also said that “normally we don’t do confirmatory tests on latent prints” because they expect them to turn out negative. To be fair, she doesn’t speak about TMB tests explicitly. So you may still claim that she didn’t mention specifically TMB tests. But nothing else.

I assume you mean presumptive tests, not confirmatory?

This line of thinking is flawed on numerous fronts.

1. TMB is a traditional follow-up test to Luminol, used to eliminate false positives common with Luminol. As has been mentioned before, it's a practice used around the world, including the SP.
2. With contradicting 'presumptive' tests, if the SP truly believed they were still dealing with blood then they would also know a confirmatory test was absolutely necessary yet they did not perform one.
3. All of this ignores the fact that neither Luminol or TMB are specific for human blood. I don't recall the specifics with the blood found in the ground floor and whether that was cat blood, but...
4. Lastly, and most importantly, the prosecution wanted to argue the Luminol traces were made from Meredith's blood yet the majority of the traces that yielded a DNA profile did not match Meredith's.

So what the prosecution wanted the courts to believe is there are Luminol traces that were made by Amanda stepping in Meredith's blood, but that somehow these traces not only lost sufficient red blood cells to result in a negative TMB test, but also lost their white blood cells resulting in a negative test for Meredith's DNA. That's a whole lotta looking the other way but amazingly two out of three courts did just that using the rationale "what else could it be". Wow...

 

[acbytesla]

I've given my reasons for believing a full acquittal is the verdict today, without a retrial.

By my reckoning, the acquittal is already agreed upon, and the judges are now in the back room playing Parchezi, or possibly Gin Rummy.

Italian state Tv has been softening up the public over the last few weeks, undermining the case against Raf, and neutral or leaning positive to Amanda - including having a world class scientist on National TV, Dr Gill, explainging that the courts made a grave mistake in their understanding of the central evidnce. Rudy Guede's sentence has been increased, and Burlesconi was finally acquitted by cassation on sex with a minor last week in a show of good faith by the judiciary, that political conflict has subsided. Girlanda's boss resigned over the broad investigation of corruption, of which Girlanda is included, so he's on a tight leash if he makes trouble. And the first thing the judges said was, "there are many uncertainties, and one definite conviction".

Renzi's government doesn't wan a tiff with the US, or an innocent Italian citizen in jail (seen to be innocent), so I'm guessing a deal has been cut.

After acquittal, Chieffi will resign, and Mignini will resign by the end of the year.

So, that's what I think. YMMV, as folks say here.

I'm amazed at the ebb and flow of the people's predictions based on the tiniest pieces of information. While your logic seems sound, I do think it is a mistake to put this much reliance on such minor points. But I do hope you are right. Amanda an Raffaele deserve the opportunity to go on with their lives without this cloud of impending doom in their future.

 

[LondonJohn]

I'm amazed at the ebb and flow of the people's predictions based on the tiniest pieces of information. While your logic seems sound, I do think it is a mistake to put this much reliance on such minor points. But I do hope you are right. Amanda an Raffaele deserve the opportunity to go on with their lives without this cloud of impending doom in their future.

Yes - I think it's wrong to try to place interpretations on every little bit of (apparent) information coming out of the SC hearing.

In my view, the only correct opinion that the SC can come to today is to overturn Nencini and send the case back to the appeal level - for Knox and Sollecito to be retried together but with clear guidance on separating their defences. And at the same time, the SC should mandate a new independent investigation and report (with conclusions and recommendations) on all the forensic work in this case, perhaps to be done by international DNA experts rather than purely Italian ones. And it should mandate full discovery of all the forensic evidence, including of course the notorious DNA EDFs.

I really don't see the SC totally annulling everything and acquitting, even though it has the nominal power to do so. I think a proper retrial is the way forward - even though it will have the effect of dragging this whole thing on for even longer, with more anguish for all involved.

But having said all that, I absolutely won't be surprised (regrettably) if the SC confirms Nencini. And if that happens, then the ECHR is the next stop - and I feel very confident that both Knox and Sollecito will get proper restitution and justice from that body, although it will of course take time (time during which Sollecito will very probably find himself incarcerated).

 

[Belz...]

To be fair, my wife's dad is gay, haha. He was married and had kids before coming out.

So his kids came out before he came out.

 

[Desert Fox]

Do lesbians often have boyfriends and marry men?

To be fair, my wife's dad is gay, haha. He was married and had kids before coming out.

I was going to add that I have several lesbian friends and several were married to men due to a trying fit in stage and had kids during that phase. This is becoming less so however.

Amanda lived in Seattle however, one of the more accepting areas as far as gays even in the earlier 2000s. Granted, this would have been before DADT was repealed but still.

 

[Kauffer]

Yes - I think it's wrong to try to place interpretations on every little bit of (apparent) information coming out of the SC hearing.

In my view, the only correct opinion that the SC can come to today is to overturn Nencini and send the case back to the appeal level - for Knox and Sollecito to be retried together but with clear guidance on separating their defences. And at the same time, the SC should mandate a new independent investigation and report (with conclusions and recommendations) on all the forensic work in this case, perhaps to be done by international DNA experts rather than purely Italian ones. And it should mandate full discovery of all the forensic evidence, including of course the notorious DNA EDFs.

I really don't see the SC totally annulling everything and acquitting, even though it has the nominal power to do so. I think a proper retrial is the way forward - even though it will have the effect of dragging this whole thing on for even longer, with more anguish for all involved.

But having said all that, I absolutely won't be surprised (regrettably) if the SC confirms Nencini. And if that happens, then the ECHR is the next stop - and I feel very confident that both Knox and Sollecito will get proper restitution and justice from that body, although it will of course take time (time during which Sollecito will very probably find himself incarcerated).

If the convictions are confirmed and Mr Sollecito is imprisoned, I would be confident that applications to the ECHR would be dealt with promptly following submission after Cassation's report. I stand to be corrected on this point though - I understand that Cassation's report is not mandated to be delivered within a particular period of time.

 

[Samson]

The ISC will do everything to avoid scrutiny by a higher power.

 

[acbytesla]

Yes - I think it's wrong to try to place interpretations on every little bit of (apparent) information coming out of the SC hearing.

In my view, the only correct opinion that the SC can come to today is to overturn Nencini and send the case back to the appeal level - for Knox and Sollecito to be retried together but with clear guidance on separating their defences. And at the same time, the SC should mandate a new independent investigation and report (with conclusions and recommendations) on all the forensic work in this case, perhaps to be done by international DNA experts rather than purely Italian ones. And it should mandate full discovery of all the forensic evidence, including of course the notorious DNA EDFs.

I really don't see the SC totally annulling everything and acquitting, even though it has the nominal power to do so. I think a proper retrial is the way forward - even though it will have the effect of dragging this whole thing on for even longer, with more anguish for all involved.

But having said all that, I absolutely won't be surprised (regrettably) if the SC confirms Nencini. And if that happens, then the ECHR is the next stop - and I feel very confident that both Knox and Sollecito will get proper restitution and justice from that body, although it will of course take time (time during which Sollecito will very probably find himself incarcerated).

I learned my lesson not to predict the outcome of the Italian courts. I know what I don't know. Maybe there is come logic to it, but I failed to comprehend it. I think this court should make some ruling that provides more fair discovery procedures and prevents the use of information from other trials being used. But case law seems to be irrelevant in Italy, so i'm not four that would provide the necessary safeguards for future cases. Right now, all I really care about is Amanda and Raffaele's freedom and future. My hopes are with and for them.

 

[Desert Fox]

I learned my lesson not to predict the outcome of the Italian courts. I know what I don't know. Maybe there is come logic to it, but I failed to comprehend it. I think this court should make some ruling that provides more fair discovery procedures and prevents the use of information from other trials being used. But case law seems to be irrelevant in Italy, so i'm not four that would provide the necessary safeguards for future cases. Right now, all I really care about is Amanda and Raffaele's freedom and future. My hopes are with and for them.

Probably be best to ask this elsewhere or on another forum but do countries that still have an inquisitorial legal system NOT rely on case law?

 

[carbonjam72]

90 days for motivations, & 'Ditching Mignini'

If the convictions are confirmed and Mr Sollecito is imprisoned, I would be confident that applications to the ECHR would be dealt with promptly following submission after Cassation's report. I stand to be corrected on this point though - I understand that Cassation's report is not mandated to be delivered within a particular period of time.

I thought judicial motivation reports are normally due within 90 days.

Although Micheli's motivation for dismissing Mignini's hair brained satanic sect conspiracy case against 20 innocent people from Florence in the Narducci trail, took over 1 year and came in at 925 pages!!?? (turned in I believe 90 days after Judge Hellman's acquittal Motivation report. I suggested Micheli was trying to conform his report to Hellman to avoid any mixed messages on Mignini's crazy theories and their 'Mignini problem'.)

By the way, delegitimizing Mignini is another urgent priority of cassation today. They simply can't allow a madman like Mignini to rise any further in the judicial hierarchy. Acquitting the defendants without re-trial is another way to undermine Mignini's standing among his colleagues and the public.

 

[carbonjam72]

Yes - I think it's wrong to try to place interpretations on every little bit of (apparent) information coming out of the SC hearing.
In my view, the only correct opinion that the SC can come to today is to overturn Nencini and send the case back to the appeal level - for Knox and Sollecito to be retried together but with clear guidance on separating their defences. And at the same time, the SC should mandate a new independent investigation and report (with conclusions and recommendations) on all the forensic work in this case, perhaps to be done by international DNA experts rather than purely Italian ones. And it should mandate full discovery of all the forensic evidence, including of course the notorious DNA EDFs.

I really don't see the SC totally annulling everything and acquitting, even though it has the nominal power to do so. I think a proper retrial is the way forward - even though it will have the effect of dragging this whole thing on for even longer, with more anguish for all involved.

But having said all that, I absolutely won't be surprised (regrettably) if the SC confirms Nencini. And if that happens, then the ECHR is the next stop - and I feel very confident that both Knox and Sollecito will get proper restitution and justice from that body, although it will of course take time (time during which Sollecito will very probably find himself incarcerated).

I revel in your ridicule, Sir!