Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[TruthCalls]

Well, there's a cure for that: they can activate their brains.

"They have been convicted twice so it's a bit odd that it should change now."

Not to continue to harp on the Kercher's, but this is just more evidence of the confirmation bias that has kept them from finding closure. I wonder if anyone pointed out to Arline that;

- They were never "convicted" of the crime.
- In-between the two guilty verdicts there was an innocent verdict. Did she really forget that?

Perhaps now that this case is closed the Kercher's will be able to take a fresh look at the evidence and come to realize that it was Guede, and only Guede, who took Meredith from them. For their sake I hope they can.

 

[Numbers]

Yes - you're quite right - there's a potential for a Guede re-trial on that issue - the motivation report may therefore remain silent on multiple attackers as far as is possible - but that is very difficult. Interesting.

Would there be a double jeopardy issue for a Guede re-trial? Even for a re-sentencing?

I think Rude Guede has gotten away relatively cheaply, as it were, for a horrible sexual assault and murder. When he is released, will he be inclined to further crime, whether burglary or worse?

Maybe some prominent guilter will take Guede in after release and support him, so that Guede will not be as likely to be tempted.

 

[Rolfe]

I do not think that is a possibility, even in Italy.

Hmmm. Someone on PMF is explaining that he couldn't be convicted for a different offence (the lone killing) on the same facts, or something like that. Is that what you meant?

Did someone ought to tell New Zealand about this? First we convict you of murdering your family at 7.15 pm, but when the Privy Council annuls that verdict on the grounds that you couldn't possibly have done that, we'll try you again on the same facts except we'll now declare you did it at 2.30 am?

Or is there some significant difference I'm not getting?

 

[Kaosium]

Would there be a double jeopardy issue for a Guede re-trial? Even for a re-sentencing?

I think Rude Guede has gotten away relatively cheaply, as it were, for a horrible sexual assault and murder. When he is released, will he be inclined to further crime, whether burglary or worse?

Maybe some prominent guilter will take Guede in after release and support him, so that Guede will not be as likely to be tempted.

What I remember about this from my research years back is they can revisit the case but not increase the sentence.

 

[Rolfe]

Would there be a double jeopardy issue for a Guede re-trial? Even for a re-sentencing?

I think Rude Guede has gotten away relatively cheaply, as it were, for a horrible sexual assault and murder. When he is released, will he be inclined to further crime, whether burglary or worse?

Maybe some prominent guilter will take Guede in after release and support him, so that Guede will not be as likely to be tempted.

It wouldn't be double jeopardy, surely, he was never acquitted. If his conviction was annulled, I don't see why he couldn't be re-tried the same way they're re-trying Lundy, but IANAL and all that.

 

[GreyFox]

Would there be a double jeopardy issue for a Guede re-trial? Even for a re-sentencing?

I think Rude Guede has gotten away relatively cheaply, as it were, for a horrible sexual assault and murder. When he is released, will he be inclined to further crime, whether burglary or worse?

Maybe some prominent guilter will take Guede in after release and support him, so that Guede will not be as likely to be tempted.

I'd be worried if I was Rudy. Remember what happened to Curatalo. He is a liability to the evil perugian empire now.

 

[Numbers]

I think the motivations report will state the obvious, that its not ok to import facts from one case to another, where the facts were never contested, and the defendants were denied an opportunity to refute the evidence placed against them.

Cassation could do a great service to Italian justice by outlining all the things that went wrong in this case, and all the protections that Knox and Sollecito were entitled to but did not receive, both under the Italian constitution and ECHR case law.

Holy crap, what a day.

Yes, and put in some statements about doing forensics, especially DNA profiling, according to the recognized international protocols.

 

[Rolfe]

What I remember about this from my research years back is they can revisit the case but not increase the sentence.

They could convict him of rape and sentence him for that?

 

[moije2]

Mach keeps ranting and raving he may get a knock at his door. Just ask Frank ! Who by the way deserves a lot of credit for his courage.

Yes please let us not forget Frank. He played a very important role in this case and was truly courageous. I will look forward to more of his incisive commentary.

 

[Kaosium]

They could convict him of rape and sentence him for that?

I don't think so, he was tried for the sexual aspect and the 'continuance' part.

I suspect this in part is why the Kerchers and their online friends can never embrace the truth: they are in part responsible for Rudy Guede getting off so easy (relatively) because they tried to pursue a theory of the crime which included Raffaele and Amanda and absolved Rudy Guede of much of the blame.

 

[GreyFox]

My money says Maresca is looking into a civil suit now. Last guilter breath.....Rita on the other hand is probably getting on a plane with Steph and the secret files.

 

[acbytesla]

The basic question remains: What happened that night?

I really believe that has settled. Rudy Guede murdered Meredith Kercher probably alone.

 

[carbonjam72]

Would there be a double jeopardy issue for a Guede re-trial? Even for a re-sentencing?

I think Rude Guede has gotten away relatively cheaply, as it were, for a horrible sexual assault and murder. When he is released, will he be inclined to further crime, whether burglary or worse?

Maybe some prominent guilter will take Guede in after release and support him, so that Guede will not be as likely to be tempted.

I don't understand why Rudy Guede will not now be tried for calunnia, intentionally blaming someone else for a crime he committed.

Now that they have an outright acquittal, wouldn't that make it impossible for Rudy to defend against if that finding is now a judicial truth?

I do think Rudy committed that crime of calunnia, as did Mignini, Stefanoni and all the rest.

But using the result of this case against Rudy, doesn't quite seem right. Seems like its too much of a slam dunk, and too open to doubling down on mistakes in the future.

This ruling today seems right, but what about the next one? Judicial truths seems pretty squishy to me.

 

[Numbers]

They could convict him of rape and sentence him for that?

If he had not been convicted of rape or sexual assault, and there is no issue of statute of limitations, it would seem to me not double jeopardy to try him for that crime.

 

[carbonjam72]

If he had not been convicted of rape or sexual assault, and there is no issue of statute of limitations, it would seem to me not double jeopardy to try him for that crime.

They could finally test the semen stain. That could help.

 

[Kaosium]

My money says Maresca is looking into a civil suit now. Last guilter breath.....Rita on the other hand is probably getting on a plane with Steph and the secret files.

How would that work? They just lost the civil part, it ran concurrently with the murder trial and Maresca was their attorney. They can file another one?

It should be kept in mind that Maresca has three more suits out there: against the Sollecito family on behalf of the Kerchers and the calunnia charges (against Amanda) representing the police as well as the one filed against Curt Knox and Ms. Mellas.

 

[moije2]

How would that work? They just lost the civil part, it ran concurrently with the murder trial and Maresca was their attorney. They can file another one?

It should be kept in mind that Maresca has three more suits out there: against the Sollecito family on behalf of the Kerchers and the calunnia charges (against Amanda) representing the police as well as the one filed against Curt Knox and Ms. Mellas.

Yes how does that work? Typically a civil suit has a different lesser burden of proof than a criminal matter. I wonder how the ISC ruling will affect Maresca's suits. Theoretcally, if a different standard is applied, the criminal cases could be thrown out while the civil cases could still be viable. I would like to think that the rumored ruling to the effect that "they didn't do it" would control and prevent further civil causes of action.

 

[Samson]

Hmmm. Someone on PMF is explaining that he couldn't be convicted for a different offence (the lone killing) on the same facts, or something like that. Is that what you meant?

Did someone ought to tell New Zealand about this? First we convict you of murdering your family at 7.15 pm, but when the Privy Council annuls that verdict on the grounds that you couldn't possibly have done that, we'll try you again on the same facts except we'll now declare you did it at 2.30 am?

Or is there some significant difference I'm not getting?

Absolutely identical shenanigans. New Zealand will be shocked when he is acqitted on monday, I will be if he is not.

 

[Kauffer]

Would there be a double jeopardy issue for a Guede re-trial? Even for a re-sentencing?

I think Rude Guede has gotten away relatively cheaply, as it were, for a horrible sexual assault and murder. When he is released, will he be inclined to further crime, whether burglary or worse?

Maybe some prominent guilter will take Guede in after release and support him, so that Guede will not be as likely to be tempted.

He can't have his sentence increased. It looks like he's got a free shot, depending on the wording of the motivations report, to go for trial review. All upside and no downside. So what will the motivation report say about multiple attackers?

 

[Kaosium]

Yes how does that work? Typically a civil suit has a different lesser burden of proof than a criminal matter. I wonder how the ISC ruling will affect Maresca's suits. Theoretcally, if a different standard is applied, the criminal cases could be thrown out while the civil cases could still be viable. I would like to think that the rumored ruling to the effect that "they didn't do it" would control and prevent further civil causes of action.

Is that true in Italy though? That holds true in the US (as I understand it) but why would it elsewhere?