Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[davefoc]

My assessment of Guede is that he is likely an inveterate liar and a sociopath/psychopath. I don't think he has any emotional need to "tell the truth" - I think he will do/say only whatever he thinks serves his own narrow self-interest the best.

I truly think that Guede has convinced himself by now that he played no active part in the murder, and that's certainly the story he has persisted in hawking. I see zero value to Guede in now saying (assuming for a moment that this is the factual truth) that he was alone when he attacked and killed Meredith Kercher. I think he is perfectly happy to believe that at least some people buy his story about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So I think that if Guede does say anything about the murder at any time after his release, it will always be along the same lines - that others actually conducted the attack and murder, and he just got caught up in the aftermath. I think he'll probably be careful not to name Sollecito or Knox though. But if he were to say exactly this, I wouldn't place any value upon it in terms of Guede telling the truth - I think it will be a predictable manifestation of Guede's lying self-preservation.

My view is different. I think Guede knows the truth. I think the general idea that he doesn't have any moral compunction to tell the truth is correct. He found himself in a desperate situation and the prosecutor offered him a path to reduce his problems and he took it. I think Guede would tell the truth if he found himself in a situation where that was to his advantage but I can't see how it will ever be to his advantage to tell the truth and as such I think he won't.

I can't see how Guede telling the truth at this point in time would affect much of anything anyway. How many people that believe in Knox and Sollecito's guilt would be swayed by a truthful statement from Guede? My guess is the number approaches zero.

But a whole lot of guilters would be really pissed at him to the point that some of them might physically assault him and that together with the possibility that the Italian justice system would stomp on him if he told the truth makes it seem to me highly unlikely that he will tell the truth.

 

[lonepinealex]

Acually, I'm increasingly hoping that "Yummi" doesn't come back in this direction. Here's his latest nasty (and, frankly, ridiculous) screed:

And something else will happen - this is something I expect - that an investigation for corruption will start on Vecchiotti, Conti and Hellmann.
I'm pretty sure this will happen.

However, any faith I could have in the efficiancy of the justice system is pretty shocked, and basically I don't think a main part of justice on this case could come from further criminal trials. It may come from civil trials, but it's not going to happen soon.
It may come from media action.
It may be possible to publish books, reports, intrviews and shoot videos that expose the truth.
The "truth" is unfortunately now much nastier and bigger than the evidence agsinst Knox and Sollecito, it will be evidence aimed at telling a big story of corruption and media lies.

I'm not really sure I fancy trying to engage in an honest debate with someone who's spouting this sort of fallacious nonsensical invective. Shame.

If they go down the hardcore conspiracist route (which I suppose is the only option now, apart from changing their minds about the case) they'll have fewer and fewer supporters. Certainly the press won't be interested anymore if all they can say is that the Mafia / Masons / Illuminati / Beyonce are behind it.

 

[Strozzi]

Yummi has now said that the USA bought the verdict! Incredible.

Yummi, please come up with the exact amount of money my country paid your court to throw the case. I as an American taxpayer need to file my tax return by April 15. If the money was paid in calendar year 2014, I should be able to deduct my per capita portion of the payment as a business or charity expense deduction from my taxes. How should I categorize it? Professional (court) fees?

 

[Kauffer]

In bringing the case to ECHR for length of trial, can the other abuses, such as denial of discovery, be brought forward as well? Perhaps it will depend on how the acquittal motivation report deals with those issues. What do you think?

Well it's got to relate to a violation as per a specific article - so that would be equality of arms, which is fair trial, which is no longer an issue because there's an acquittal, so this is difficult.

I agree the motivation report, since it will sign off the case, will be instructive, but one of the negative aspects of an acquittal from the point of view of cleaning up Italian justice (and I know that sounds absurd) is that Italy probably gets to keep most of the violations in house. But maybe there will be an in house clean up - we can hope.

But the calunnia case gives the ECHR quite a bit of scope to do good work, though not, sadly anything on discovery.

Ed - wouldn't it be great if the motivations report referenced procedural rights violations and discovery - citing ECHR case law?

 

[Kauffer]

Yummi, please come up with the exact amount of money my country paid your court to throw the case. I as an American taxpayer need to file my tax return by April 15. If the money was paid in calendar year 2014, I should be able to deduct my per capita portion of the payment as a business or charity expense deduction from my taxes.

He mentioned "under the table" but it might not be money he has in mind, but favours.

 

[Desert Fox]

He is probably closer to this case than any of us imagine and these last days he appeared to be in a melt down state trying to find any argument that still had teeth.

I have to agree that his answer when I compared Amanda to Eric Wilson to be nonsensical.

 

[LondonJohn]

My view is different. I think Guede knows the truth. I think the general idea that he doesn't have any moral compunction to tell the truth is correct. He found himself in a desperate situation and the prosecutor offered him a path to reduce his problems and he took it. I think Guede would tell the truth if he found himself in a situation where that was to his advantage but I can't see how it will ever be to his advantage to tell the truth and as such I think he won't.

But that's pretty much exactly my reasoning on this issue too! Guede will never tell the truth out of any sort of duty or shame/guilt. The only reason he would ever admit to being the sole attacker is if he stood to gain by doing so. And like you, I don't see there ever being a situation where he might stand to gain by admitting to being the sole attacker. So he will never admit it. So he will never tell the truth.

I can't see how Guede telling the truth at this point in time would affect much of anything anyway. How many people that believe in Knox and Sollecito's guilt would be swayed by a truthful statement from Guede? My guess is the number approaches zero.

I entirely agree with this too. I think it's also worth pointing out that those who entertain notions of Guede writing a "tell all" book ought to think again. There's zero public appetite -whether in Italy or the US/UK for his side of the story, and a virtual certainty that no publisher would even take him on.

But a whole lot of guilters would be really pissed at him to the point that some of them might physically assault him and that together with the possibility that the Italian justice system would stomp on him if he told the truth makes it seem to me highly unlikely that he will tell the truth.

I hope none of that happens. And actually, I think it suits most of the pro-guilt community to preserve Guede's position exactly as it is right now. In that way, they can continue to convince themselves that Knox and Sollecito are nothing more than "the ones that got away".

 

[TruthCalls]

While I don't think the Kerchers have behaved honourably throughout this (and their "dignified silence" is a joke), I think we have to consider that the confirmation bias ordinary guilters suffer from is nothing compared to that of the Kerchers'.

Apart from the natural trust they'd have put in the Italian authorities and their lawyer, we've no reason to think they've studied this case as we or the guilters have. They may just want to close their minds to everything except what their lawyer tells them, because it's all too traumatic to delve into. I can understand that.

I agree, and I don't want to come across as criticizing them. However, the difference in this case is there was someone who was proven to be there and who had motive and opportunity. It's one thing when there are no other viable suspects, but they have always taken the position that if Amanda and Raffaele are not guilty then they still have no answer. I envision some one standing there, arms in the air declaring "HELLO, Rudy Guede??". Why is it NOT a solution, not closure for them?

 

[Strozzi]

My view is different. I think Guede knows the truth. I think the general idea that he doesn't have any moral compunction to tell the truth is correct. He found himself in a desperate situation and the prosecutor offered him a path to reduce his problems and he took it. I think Guede would tell the truth if he found himself in a situation where that was to his advantage but I can't see how it will ever be to his advantage to tell the truth and as such I think he won't.

I can't see how Guede telling the truth at this point in time would affect much of anything anyway. How many people that believe in Knox and Sollecito's guilt would be swayed by a truthful statement from Guede? My guess is the number approaches zero.

But a whole lot of guilters would be really pissed at him to the point that some of them might physically assault him and that together with the possibility that the Italian justice system would stomp on him if he told the truth makes it seem to me highly unlikely that he will tell the truth.

Will alcohol loosen his tongue?

 

[Kaosium]

Acually, I'm increasingly hoping that "Yummi" doesn't come back in this direction. Here's his latest nasty (and, frankly, ridiculous) screed:

And something else will happen - this is something I expect - that an investigation for corruption will start on Vecchiotti, Conti and Hellmann.
I'm pretty sure this will happen.

However, any faith I could have in the efficiancy of the justice system is pretty shocked, and basically I don't think a main part of justice on this case could come from further criminal trials. It may come from civil trials, but it's not going to happen soon.
It may come from media action.
It may be possible to publish books, reports, intrviews and shoot videos that expose the truth.
The "truth" is unfortunately now much nastier and bigger than the evidence agsinst Knox and Sollecito, it will be evidence aimed at telling a big story of corruption and media lies.

I'm not really sure I fancy trying to engage in an honest debate with someone who's spouting this sort of fallacious nonsensical invective. Shame.

I always found his input useful, even when what he was saying wasn't true. That tells you something too....

Question for you since he isn't here:

What does this amount to, officially? Did they just restore Hellmann? So few thought an outright acquittal likely there was almost no discussion of it happening--some were saying it wasn't even possible.

 

[Dan O.]

Did Guede actually rape her as she lay dying? Or did he masterbate over her genital area and ejaculate on the pillow under her hips?

If he did that, he is a monster that should never be allowed to walk free again for this will be in him and he will eventually repeat the crime or escalate.

But that is not what I believe happened. I have withheld this explanation because there was the hope that Rudy would confess to shed the monster stigma above.

The semen stain must still be wet to be transferred by the shoe. That sets a time window on when the semen was deposited. That Meredith's body is covering the pillow where the shoe print left the transferred stain further constrains the window to before Meredith's body is placed on the pillow.

We don't have a constraint on when the pillow was on the floor. It could have been taken off the bed during the struggle. Or, Meredith Meredith might have taken it off in preparing to change the linens that morning.

The window appears to rule out Rudy masterbating over Meredith after the murder. A possibility remains for a sexual release at the same time as the Murder. if Rudy ended up loosing his own pants during the struggle. And there is a large window of opportunity for Rudy to be masterbating alone in Meredith's room before going to the bathroom to clean up and before taking the dump.

It is the last possibility that would have the least cause for concern for Rudy's future behavior and the one I would expect him to confess to if the stain were ever confirmed to be his.

 

[anglolawyer]

Acually, I'm increasingly hoping that "Yummi" doesn't come back in this direction. Here's his latest nasty (and, frankly, ridiculous) screed:

And something else will happen - this is something I expect - that an investigation for corruption will start on Vecchiotti, Conti and Hellmann.
I'm pretty sure this will happen.

However, any faith I could have in the efficiancy of the justice system is pretty shocked, and basically I don't think a main part of justice on this case could come from further criminal trials. It may come from civil trials, but it's not going to happen soon.
It may come from media action.
It may be possible to publish books, reports, intrviews and shoot videos that expose the truth.
The "truth" is unfortunately now much nastier and bigger than the evidence agsinst Knox and Sollecito, it will be evidence aimed at telling a big story of corruption and media lies.

I'm not really sure I fancy trying to engage in an honest debate with someone who's spouting this sort of fallacious nonsensical invective. Shame.

The debate is over, LJ. The rest is mopping up (await the motivation and the outcome of the ECHR appeal). My main concern now is: WTF are we supposed to talk about now?

 

[LondonJohn]

Well it's got to relate to a violation as per a specific article - so that would be equality of arms, which is fair trial, which is no longer an issue because there's an acquittal, so this is difficult.

I agree the motivation report, since it will sign off the case, will be instructive, but one of the negative aspects of an acquittal from the point of view of cleaning up Italian justice (and I know that sounds absurd) is that Italy probably gets to keep most of the violations in house. But maybe there will be an in house clean up - we can hope.

But the calunnia case gives the ECHR quite a bit of scope to do good work, though not, sadly anything on discovery.

In addition to this issue, I think it's also worth remembering that another - potentially highly inflammatory - issue might rear its head when the SC motivations come out.

It revolves around the "other attackers" factor. In its motivation on today's verdict, the SC will have to explain whether a) it concluded that it still agrees with the Guede SC ruling that there were multiple attackers, and that it doesn't find that Knox or Sollecito were those additional attackers; or b) it concluded that in fact there was probably only one attacker - Guede - and that this is one of the reasons behind the immediate acquittals of Knox and Sollecito. And of course, if it's (b), then Guede is notionally entitled to a full review of his case and potentially even a retrial, since the SC would effectively be overturning a finding of fact that was rubber-stamped by the SC as part of his original conviction.

I therefore suspect that this latest SC motivation might prevaricate somewhat on this issue. They might, for example, say that in their view it's impossible to say whether the crime was committed by one or more than one assailant, and that since there's no evidence against Knox or Sollecito, they cannot be considered as additional assailants - even if additional assailants did participate in the crime.....

 

[Dougm]

I picked this out of the AP story on the case:

In a rare decision, the supreme Court of Cassation overturned last year's convictions by a Florence appeals court and declined to order another trial. The judges declared that the two did not commit the crime, a stronger exoneration than merely finding that there wasn't enough evidence to convict.
Hmmm, I hate to accept this as gospel, since the media has gotten so much wrong on this case, but there were similar things written after the Hellmann verdict, and they turned out to be accurate.

I would love to hear exactly what the judges said today when the verdict was read.

http://news.yahoo.com/lawyer-knoxs-ex-boyfriend-makes-final-court-appeal-093041840.html

 

[Samson]

Now Yummi has written

But there is one thing I want to tell you: Vecchiotti and Hellmann are not off, we will go and get them.
I believe we will expose the whole thing in the end, like in the Ustica massacre.

The person who could write that may be clinically insane.

 

[LondonJohn]

I always found his input useful, even when what he was saying wasn't true. That tells you something too....

Question for you since he isn't here:

What does this amount to, officially? Did they just restore Hellmann? So few thought an outright acquittal likely, there was almost no discussion of it happening--some were saying it wasn't even possible.

No, as far as I understand, this verdict has in effect nullified both Nencini and Massei. The Hellmann verdict had already been nullified by the previous SC ruling, so there was nothing there to reinstate in any case.

 

[js202]

Acually, I'm increasingly hoping that "Yummi" doesn't come back in this direction. Here's his latest nasty (and, frankly, ridiculous) screed:

And something else will happen - this is something I expect - that an investigation for corruption will start on Vecchiotti, Conti and Hellmann.
I'm pretty sure this will happen.

However, any faith I could have in the efficiancy of the justice system is pretty shocked, and basically I don't think a main part of justice on this case could come from further criminal trials. It may come from civil trials, but it's not going to happen soon.
It may come from media action.
It may be possible to publish books, reports, intrviews and shoot videos that expose the truth.
The "truth" is unfortunately now much nastier and bigger than the evidence agsinst Knox and Sollecito, it will be evidence aimed at telling a big story of corruption and media lies.

I'm not really sure I fancy trying to engage in an honest debate with someone who's spouting this sort of fallacious nonsensical invective. Shame.

Make no mistake. He'll be back. There is an ego investment that will not be denied.

 

[Bill Williams]

Acually, I'm increasingly hoping that "Yummi" doesn't come back in this direction. Here's his latest nasty (and, frankly, ridiculous) screed:

And something else will happen - this is something I expect - that an investigation for corruption will start on Vecchiotti, Conti and Hellmann.
I'm pretty sure this will happen.

However, any faith I could have in the efficiancy of the justice system is pretty shocked, and basically I don't think a main part of justice on this case could come from further criminal trials. It may come from civil trials, but it's not going to happen soon.
It may come from media action.
It may be possible to publish books, reports, intrviews and shoot videos that expose the truth.
The "truth" is unfortunately now much nastier and bigger than the evidence agsinst Knox and Sollecito, it will be evidence aimed at telling a big story of corruption and media lies.

I'm not really sure I fancy trying to engage in an honest debate with someone who's spouting this sort of fallacious nonsensical invective. Shame.

I've just returned from the Freemasons' Hall here where I made a donation!

 

[Bill Williams]

No, as far as I understand, this verdict has in effect nullified both Nencini and Massei. The Hellmann verdict had already been nullified by the previous SC ruling, so there was nothing there to reinstate in any case.

The motivations report from this will be dissected by the hardest-core of guilters unto the seventh generation.

 

[Rolfe]

The debate is over, LJ. The rest is mopping up (await the motivation and the outcome of the ECHR appeal). My main concern now is: WTF are we supposed to talk about now?

Hi, Clive! Read the book yet?