Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[acbytesla]

LOL. Big Mig is screwed. Nothing like an overly-motivated opposing lawyer in a case in which proof of your own misconduct is the defense.

No offense, but I think this is wishful thinking. Mignini committed a farce with the MOF case and was actually promoted. My guess is that the local and internal politics in Umbria won't lead to that... not that I really know.

 

[Welshman]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

 

[Strawberry]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

No I think that's unfair. It would be fair to say there's something rotten in the state of Perugia, but not the whole of Italy.

 

[komponisto]

I'm told if you ask a man under a certain age to name a 3-letter word ending in "x", he will immediately say "sex". If you ask the same question to a man over that age, then he will immediately say "tax".
(Can't remember what the watershed was: 25? 35?)

(My first thought was "fox", and given where I encountered this question, I'm sorry to say that media coverage of this case may have provided some contextual priming...)

 

[Desert Fox]

I hope people Stateside can access the BBC video segments and watch Arline's little interview.

You have to feel sorry for her. She's completely out of her depth trying to understand anything to do with the case. And she's also clearly sick.

Someone needs to find a way to get through to her and her family - then this thing will be truly over.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-32122369

I am in a really horrid internet signal area so I am going to have to listen to this later

 

[acbytesla]

I'm told if you ask a man under a certain age to name a 3-letter word ending in "x", he will immediately say "sex". If you ask the same question to a man over that age, then he will immediately say "tax".
(Can't remember what the watershed was: 25? 35?)

That sounds like a joke...but then, maybe not. Thank God I haven't reached the latter age. Not sure if that means I'm over sexed or under taxed.

 

[Kauffer]

That second criminal charge for calunnia relates to Amanda Knox stating in court testimony that Italian police threatened her and hit her during her Nov. 5/6, 2007 interrogation, IIUC.

Assuming she were convicted of that charge in Italy, the first question would be, what would be the US crime? (To extradite someone, the crimes must be identical, in facts not name, in the two countries, and be a punishable by at least one year in prison.) If perjury, where is the objective evidence that she was not telling the truth? The police did not make any audio or video recording of the interrogation, if one exists, public. So it is doubtful if there would be "probable cause" in the US. Plus, that interrogation should have had at least an audio recording to comply with Italian criminal procedure law, and she should have been warned of her right to silence an been provided with an attorney during the interrogation. And she has applied to the ECHR regarding her conviction for calunnia against Patrick Lumumba, alleging that Italy violated her rights under the European Convention on Human Rights in the interrogation.

So, the short answer is she would not be extradited if an Italian court somehow convicted her of this "calunnia" against the police, IMO.

This case would go to the ECHR too.

 

[RoseMontague]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

You could probably pick out a few cases in any country and make a similar statement. Including the US and Canada. I like the three level trial system that Italy has. I don't like the witness/suspect definition thing as it gives the cops a free pass to cheat. The way they handle disclosure of evidence is particularly unfair to those accused. Having judges on the "jury" is also something that seems to favor the prosecution. Things move so slowly even when the trial starts sometimes only having 1 hearing in a week or more and taking a break for summer seems crazy. The protective detention thing is abused.

 

[Kauffer]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

Dysfunctional, Yes! Corrupt is a bit strong - for me.

 

[Kauffer]

You could probably pick out a few cases in any country and make a similar statement. Including the US and Canada. I like the three level trial system that Italy has. I don't like the witness/suspect definition thing as it gives the cops a free pass to cheat. The way they handle disclosure of evidence is particularly unfair to those accused. Having judges on the "jury" is also something that seems to favor the prosecution. Things move so slowly even when the trial starts sometimes only having 1 hearing in a week or more and taking a break for summer seems crazy. The protective detention thing is abused.

They haven't worked out if it is inquisitorial or adversarial, the judges and the prosecutors are in the same club and they don't understand beyond a reasonable doubt. They also don't understand ECHR case law. Some of their legislation is directly uncompliant with it.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't think it's even as strong as this. I doubt there was any communication whatsoever between the US DoS and the Italian judiciary, nor that there was any communication from US DoS to Italian Executive Govt to Italian judiciary. I do however think that the SC judicial panel would have been minded of the US's stance on extradition, and that this might possibly have prompted them to consider the logical ramifications: is the US DoS saying the US wouldn't extradite simply because they are blindly protecting a US citizen regardless of the evidence of guilt, or is this instead a useful indicator that convictions would be wrongful here?

I think we have to bear in mind that it's a cornerstone of justice systems in modern democracies that 1) everyone is equal under the law, 2) nobody can buy or otherwise influence the administration of justice, 3) the judiciary must be - and must be seen to be - wholly independent from every other arm of government.

And that's why I would argue that if this SC panel of five judges really was "nobbled" (and I think it's a preposterous and incorrect accusation, but for the sake of this argument...), then observers - especially Italian ones - should be focussing their attention pretty heavily on the shocking thought that the Italian judiciary, from the very highest level down, can be bought, influenced, corrupted etc.

I feel confident that if there was ever any credible thought in the UK that our Supreme Court or High Courts (or even Crown Courts of Magistrates' Courts) could be corrupted at will, or bought off, or politically influenced, there would be a stupendous outcry at a number of levels. In fact, it would trigger something of a constitutional crisis here, I'm sure.

I think it is important to remember that the Italian Supreme Court isn't remotely similar to the US Supreme Court. There are over 300 magistrates overseeing thousands of cases whereas the US Supreme Court is made up of 9 justices who rule on less than a hundred cases a year. I can tell you every single member of our court. My guess is that the vast majority of judges in Italy toil in anonymity. Are the justices there susceptible to bribes and corruption? Italy is notorious for that, but I really don't know if that reputation is well founded.

 

[Strawberry]

I think it is important to remember that the Italian Supreme Court isn't remotely similar to the US Supreme Court. There are over 300 magistrates overseeing thousands of cases whereas the US Supreme Court is made up of 9 justices who rule on less than a hundred cases a year. I can tell you every single member of our court. My gusset is that the vast majority of judges in Italy toil in anonymity. Are the justices there susceptible to bribes and corruption? Italy is notorious for that, but I really don't know if that reputation is well founded.

Your gusset?

 

[lonepinealex]

They haven't worked out if it is inquisitorial or adversarial, the judges and the prosecutors are in the same club and they don't understand beyond a reasonable doubt. They also don't understand ECHR case law. Some of their legislation is directly uncompliant with it.

Given the number of cases against Italy at the ECHR, there must be a systemic problem. The length of trials is surely a major aspect of this.

 

[komponisto]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

Since this case began, I've moved toward something like radical skepticism of the functionality of justice systems in general, or indeed most "systems" or "institutions" in general -- at least as regards their stated purposes (which might be different from their real purposes). They just don't reliably do what they're ostensibly designed to do.

If the Italian justice system were functional -- that is to say, capable of reliably processing information about whether criminal charges are true or not -- the Hellmann verdict would never have been overturned. (One might even argue that the Massei trial would have ended in acquittal, or better yet that the case wouldn't have been brought at all -- but I'm willing to allow occasional errors and still call a system "basically functional". But when it specifically anti-corrects the corrections of its errors, that looks to me less like the expected occasional mistake and more like unpredictable chaos.)

 

[kwill]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

Dysfunctional justice system? Speaking only for myself, I think Italy's justice system functions poorly because:

1. There is not enough separation between investigations and prosecutions.
2. There is an assumption that a first trial conviction may or may not mean anything, and every conviction is automatically appealed.
3. There is a possibility that questionable rulings from a fast track trial can become part of legal fact for use in associated trials, as happened in this case.

Corrupt justice system? Again, just my opinion:

1. Police leaking information to eager reporters corrupts the process.
2. Having jury panels exposed to reporting that may or may not be accurate and always reflects police/prosecution views corrupts the process.

I'm sure anyone who pays attention to the justice system in the USA could easily create an analogous list. The items would be different, but the dysfunction and corruption obviously exist.

 

[Planigale]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

Rather naively I wondered whether this might bring pro-guilt and pro-innocence proponents together. Yes, I still think there are serious defects in the justice system. I have always thought that guilty or innocent better forensics would have clarified the issue. Pro-guilt commentators are now prepared to consider that the forensics were lacking or the legal systen is corrupt. If they came here we might now agree on some issues if not the result of better judicial assessment.

 

[Numbers]

This case would go to the ECHR too.

Indeed. It would be as questionable as the case regarding calunnia against Lumumba, but for different reasons. Her statements called calunnia were made as part of her court testimony.

That they can be called calunnia and subject to criminal prosecution shows that there is no practical means to complain of police misconduct in Italy (at least in this case). In fact, Amanda and her lawyers should be pointing out this 2nd calunnia case to the ECHC in their application on the 1st case.

 

[Desert Fox]

Many on this board have criticised the Italian justice system. Do you feel that despite the supreme court annulling the verdicts, it is still fair to say Italy has a corrupt and dysfuctional justice system.

Of note, I think every legal system needs to be open to criticism.
The way that some authorities tried to prevent criticism was horrid.

 

[RoseMontague]

Of note, I think every legal system needs to be open to criticism.
The way that some authorities tried to prevent criticism was horrid.

That's a great point.

 

[Strozzi]

This case would go to the ECHR too.

The second calunia case may be a case of she said/she said. To convict Knox of calunia for stating that she was hit by a police officer from behind would presumably require a court to be satisfied that a) she was not struck, and b) that Knox is lying about it in an effort to condem an innocent person.

Here are thoughts to consider that go to her defense:

1. It is possible the supreme court motivation document may comment on how improper was police evidence collection, decision-making, etc. and their poor logic (lack of good faith) in the early days of the investigation, including in the interrogation. That might be an indicator of the police environment, overall, during the interrogation period.
2. Police failure to record the interrogation, which they and only they surely had the means to do.
3. An ear witness - Sollecito, in an interrogation room down the hall, can testify about the screams from Knox that he heard (and was threatened over). This goes to the atmospherics in Knox's interrogation room, controlled by the police present. (Do police higher-ups really want Sollicito on the witness stand recounting for the court and media the screams her heard from Knox at the hands of Napoleoni's detective squad in a midnight interrogation. That testimony will bring a hundred journalists and TV crews back to Perugia to broadcast to the world. I can't wait to see how the Daily Mail headlines this! Say goodbye to Perugia's recovering tourist and foreign-student economy.).
4. Mignini is video-recorded telling an American TV investigative reporter that perhaps Knox was "bumped" from behind during interrogation. He took over the case from the police in the interrogation room. He half-admits contact was made.
5. Knox wrote down in her prison cell that night that she had been hit a few hours earlier. That is a contemporaneous record of the incident; it is as good as anything a prisoner can do to memorialize the event.
6. Knox is recorded on a prison recording telling her parents of being hit. It sounds legit. Play the tape in court and for the world media.
7. Grill Mignini on the witness stand about what he did to investigate the incident the night it allegedly occurred. He will have to admit he did nothing.
8. Show photos and video coverage of Napoleoni's Amazon squad taking Knox blindfolded out the police station front door in front of the cameras as they took her to prison. That image hardly depicts "equality of arms".

ETA: Many police who were at police headquarters that night signed the complaint and joined the lawsuit against Knox. Some never entered the interrogation room, so would have no firsthand knowledge whether Knox was struck or not. A few of these police have apparently withdrawn from the lawsuit for damages against Knox. A good defense attorney for Knox can grill each police officer. It is likely that one or several will break and tell the backstory of what the police were trying to do to Knox that night or by suing her for complaining she was hit. There is an ugly, behind the scenes story about what the police were doing in going after Knox a second time.