• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
By the way, I think it's worth repeating here for clarity: the fact that the SC went for straight-out acquittals - rather than annulling the Nencini convictions and sending the case back for a further appeal-level trial - is extremely important. It implies that the SC must have believed that the case for conviction had absolutely no merit. If the SC had merely been unhappy over aspects of the Nencini convictions, but still believed that there was fundamentally a case to answer, the case would undoubtedly have been kicked back down for another appeal trial, with further SC recommendations.

And that's well worth bearing in mind if certain pro-guilt commentators might try to rationalise this decision along the lines of "Well, the SC might have thought they were probably guilty, but that the Nencini court hadn't made a watertight case for guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".......
 
Samson said:
Sarah Scazzi?
Click to expand...

Yes - let's not imagine that this makes any real dent in injustice world-wide. Corrupt police, idiot judges, and complacent public opinion are a big problem in all countries.

And let's not go congratulating Italian justice over-much either. The latest ISC panel deserve enormous credit for taking a bold, rational decision - but it was another ISC in March 2013 that committed the biggest single scandal of the whole affair.

Maybe the lengthy brouhaha over this case will serve to force the reform of the Italian system, but as long as the likes of Sabrina and Cosima Misseri remain in jail then there is a lot to do.
 
icerat said:
What does the second part have to do with the calunnia conviction?
Click to expand...
Calunnia is a crime committed only when knowingly accusing an innocent. Amanda could not know he was innocent.

From wikipedia

Anyone who with a denunciation, complaint, demand or request, even anonymously or under a false name, directs a judicial authority or other authority that has an obligation to report, to blame someone for a crime who he knows is innocent, that is he fabricates evidence against someone,
 
carbonjam72 said:
This is probably true. We hear about wrongful convictions being overturned in decades, 18, 20, 30 years.

I'm not saying this process made sense. But Italy caught this mistake far more quickly then we in the US seem to catch ours.
Click to expand...


<snip>

I can't help but wonder if the internet age has contributed to that. All that public questioning, pressure, the expertise of a wide variety of people from all over the world - has there ever been a case with so many voices chiming in? So much investigation work done by unconnected people just wanting to help out? Maybe eventually they had to listen.

It seems to be happening with Russ Faria too - he was only convicted two years ago and already it looks like he might be getting an appeal. Probably in no small part due to the work of the online campaigns and the TV network that has been supporting him.
 
TruthCalls said:
I was just thinking of Hellmann. I'd be really interested to hear him respond to this verdict as it completely vindicates his court's findings. In fact, I'm wondering if Cassation will reference his court's opinion. Is it possible they came to this decision because Cassation's arguments for overturning Hellmann were invalid?
Click to expand...

Interesting thought. Maybe they took a look at all the past decisions, and said to each other, "We really should have just confirmed Hellmann". So they did, as close as they could. I guess we'll see when the motivation comes out.
 
Dougm said:
I agree. One thing I have learned from this experience is how the internet now allows us to reach out and connect with so many intelligent people who have so many things to contribute, to this, or any discussion.

Of course, that is also a double edged sword, but this is a positive post, so I will not go there! I have enjoyed reading the posts of everyone and learning from all of you.
Click to expand...

I agree Doug. I have learned so much from so many. Thank you.
 
A predictably nasty banner headline on TJMK in response to the SC ruling, written by that nasty, strange little man Quennell:

Breaking news: Convictions overturned. Now Cassation has to explain in writing in a way that does not smell of a deal. Knox has served three years for calunnia and that felony record stands for life. Also Knox and Sollecito face trials already in motion for their books and for what Knox claimed on the stand in 2009. That their claims were wrong (example here) look not too difficult to prove. An OJ Simpson outcome, Italy style, perhaps?

I hope it's not long before Quennell retires into his sad little hole with his sick little fantasies.
 
LondonJohn said:
A predictably nasty banner headline on TJMK in response to the SC ruling, written by that nasty, strange little man Quennell:

Breaking news: Convictions overturned. Now Cassation has to explain in writing in a way that does not smell of a deal. Knox has served three years for calunnia and that felony record stands for life. Also Knox and Sollecito face trials already in motion for their books and for what Knox claimed on the stand in 2009. That their claims were wrong (example here) look not too difficult to prove. An OJ Simpson outcome, Italy style, perhaps?

I hope it's not long before Quennell retires into his sad little hole with his sick little fantasies.
Click to expand...

We had ways of dealing with people like this in the playground.
 
LondonJohn said:
A predictably nasty banner headline on TJMK in response to the SC ruling, written by that nasty, strange little man Quennell:

Breaking news: Convictions overturned. Now Cassation has to explain in writing in a way that does not smell of a deal. Knox has served three years for calunnia and that felony record stands for life. Also Knox and Sollecito face trials already in motion for their books and for what Knox claimed on the stand in 2009. That their claims were wrong (example here) look not too difficult to prove. An OJ Simpson outcome, Italy style, perhaps?

I hope it's not long before Quennell retires into his sad little hole with his sick little fantasies.
Click to expand...

What's the situation with the subplot trials? In practice, I imagine they will probably be quietly dropped, but can they theoretically cause Amanda and Raff grief?
 
TruthCalls said:
I was just thinking of Hellmann. I'd be really interested to hear him respond to this verdict as it completely vindicates his court's findings. In fact, I'm wondering if Cassation will reference his court's opinion. Is it possible they came to this decision because Cassation's arguments for overturning Hellmann were invalid?
Click to expand...

He did respond. He said he got it right. Lol.
 
Kauffer said:
I still think we should chase down those EDFs and the questura recordings if they exist.

Your contributions here, both before I started posting and since, have been immense.
Click to expand...

I suspect that recordings of the interrogations were made but that police managers who were involved that evening and Mignini connived to deny it. If any of them retained a copy of the recordings, which probably would have been made in and retained as a digital file, they could destroy it to conceal their guilt. If others can get their hands on the file they can sell it to a media organization or publisher for a million Euros.

There is one place where such a file may exist. It could exist on a remote storage device, if the recording system at police headquarters automatically backed up files to a remote (off-site) storage device.
 
Dougm said:
I agree. One thing I have learned from this experience is how the internet now allows us to reach out and connect with so many intelligent people who have so many things to contribute, to this, or any discussion.

Of course, that is also a double edged sword, but this is a positive post, so I will not go there! I have enjoyed reading the posts of everyone and learning from all of you.
Click to expand...

Same here. I haven't been posting as long as many, but I'm grateful for the chance to challenge and be challenged.

Funny how all the tension seems gone.
 
LondonJohn said:
By the way, I think it's worth repeating here for clarity: the fact that the SC went for straight-out acquittals - rather than annulling the Nencini convictions and sending the case back for a further appeal-level trial - is extremely important. It implies that the SC must have believed that the case for conviction had absolutely no merit. If the SC had merely been unhappy over aspects of the Nencini convictions, but still believed that there was fundamentally a case to answer, the case would undoubtedly have been kicked back down for another appeal trial, with further SC recommendations.

And that's well worth bearing in mind if certain pro-guilt commentators might try to rationalise this decision along the lines of "Well, the SC might have thought they were probably guilty, but that the Nencini court hadn't made a watertight case for guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".......
Click to expand...

Yes, I think this is right, but, I don't think the 'judicial truths' established at trial have been over turned, so, as far as the judiciary is concerned, Ms Kercher was killed by Guede and others.

Not much closure for the Kerchers if that is true and they continue to buy it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom