Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[RoseMontague]

I think Stef's lab work was seen as 'a made to order evidence manufacturing service', not so much as an independent forensic lab.

Yep,yep.

 

[lonepinealex]

There's an echo-chamber like quality to ALL the postings on-line about this, on all sites, on all sides. Whereas M. has had an obvious impact here as well as on the other, more "legally exposed" sites, it's the likes of us who participate in giving him his larger than life reputation.

If it weren't for us, Peter Quennell would only refer to having access to 10s of lawyers. Given the attention paid to the fellow at places like ISF and IIP/IA, Peter risks inflating that evaluation by making M. representative of 100s of lawyers.

Bring up Machiavelli around a lunch table, and the person bringing him up seems a tad, shall we say, eccentric (!) to those in the real world!

It matters, but all of us here have to appreciate just how far up in the bleachers we are! The attention any of us gets is a little self-referential, and does not necessarily translate to the real world.

Apparently, this goes for Machiavelli, too.

I agree completely with this. Although gullible journalists are frustrating, I think there is a tendency for those of us who are into this case on both sides to overstate the influence of the online discussions.

It's amazing how little the guilters disturb you if you don't read their forums or tweets! Although I completely see that I have the luxury of ignoring them because other stalwart people do the hard work of keeping the balance of information out there. I'd still be a guilter if it wasn't for sites like IIP.

 

[Kaosium]

Plus... what is the point (especially on a sceptics' forum) of coming into this thread to request that its participants "give it a rest"?? If this member is bored or fed up by the continuation of the debate, all (s)he needs to do is not click on the thread title, and restrict himself/herself to reading and contributing to threads in which (s)he really does have an interest. Is the continuation of the debate in this thread giving this member any material problems with his/her ability to read or contribute to everything else within this forum?

They have no idea what happened in this case and the online debate surrounding it and odds are they never will. It looks nutty to some people.

 

[lonepinealex]

Porta a Porta summary from TeddyIIP:

<snip>

Roberta Bruzzone: as usual, talks about the forensics needs to be improved, with more rigorous controls during site inspections required. We’ve avoided the worst possible scenario with this acquittal, i.e. putting an innocent in prison. Caso Chiuso was too quick to show the world how effective the investigators were. Analysis in second appeal revealed nothing new. Nothing found on the knife. Don’t expect Rudy to talk now, he is the one who benefits most by not saying anything, and benefited most by how the trials were carried out. Jokingly admits to being nearly always a guilter. Believes that Raffaele’s separation strategy opened the door for a rethink and overturn of the convictions for both Amanda and Raffaele.

<snip>

Wut. I s'pose four years of wrongful imprisonment is a cake walk. Still, could have been worse, eh Roberta?

 

[platonov]

But not everyone is convinced.

I know you don’t like hearing from black people [ or is it just PL ] but it appears AK is in the news again

Totally innocent Amanda Knox, who falsely accused her black former boss Patrick Lumumba of murdering her flatmate Meredith Kercher, has now
blamed another black man for a series of historic crimes dating back to 1912.
Knox says she’s convinced 24-year old black man James Henry Wellington carried out a series of shocking crimes including sinking the Titanic, the Great Train Robbery and shooting JR from the popular 80s TV show Dallas.
But not everyone is convinced.
A source close to Knox who wants to remain anonymous said that as a child Knox used to point at random black people while walking down the street and shout “he did it” in the hope that she could wrongly implicate a black person for some misdeed.

 

[andreajo]

Florence, April 1 (Askanews) - "The case is closed, we are tired." So the lawyer Francesco Maresca, who defended the Kercher family as a civil party in the trial for the death of Meredith, said cold the decision of the Supreme Court, which acquitted definitively Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. At the "shock" declared by the family of the victim after the ruling, in a statement, after a week Maresca stresses, with the news agency Askanews, that "with regard to the Kercher case is closed, have taken note of what is a final judgment. http://www.askanews.it/top-10/la-famiglia-di-meredith-s-arrende-siamo-stanchi-per-noi-caso-chiuso_711467068.htm

Per Google translate

 

[Kaosium]

I know you don’t like hearing from black people [ or is it just PL ] but it appears AK is in the news again

If you think her guilty and racist, why did she risk spending so much of her life in prison to protect Rudy Guede?

 

[Myriad]

Dette Amanda Knox ikke vigtigt. I Danmark har vi sand mordgåde tilfælde uløste på fire hundrede år. Royal forlovede druknede og prins og mange andre kongelige embedsmænd stukket og forgiftet. Diskuter beviser og løse sagen venligst.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Sebastien Winther

 

[platonov]

This seems to be a recurring groupie mantra.
Given that in Italy it is widely perceived that RS is a dangerous lowlife who got away with murder because of his Papa’s connections individuals there would rightfully be fearful of the Sollecito clan and their legal friends.

However it’s unlikely that either of the pair who recently had their rape/murder convictions annulled will be defending their honour in the London courts for example.
We shall see but don’t hold your breath.

ps Ah now I see why misogyny is a thread tag.

Wake up! They won't be the defence this time.

Notwithstanding, they might not have to anyway, if the nutters, haters, sociopaths and malcontents who populate some of your favourite websites cross the line of Section 127 of the Communications Act. The crown prosecution service will do it for them.

What - ‘defending their honour’ is a figure of speech. Britney & Knife Boy would be the plaintiffs in this very unlikely scenario.

ISF is my favourite website and as such the terms you use are over the top.
I restrict myself to the term ‘groupie’.

 

[Kaosium]

Dette Amanda Knox ikke vigtigt. I Danmark har vi sand mordgåde tilfælde uløste på fire hundrede år. Royal forlovede druknede og prins og mange andre kongelige embedsmænd stukket og forgiftet. Diskuter beviser og løse sagen venligst.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Sebastien Winther

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet

 

[Diocletus]

Hellman’ recent words about his horrible treatment by the Perugian judiciary have really clarified some things for me. I’m now starting to see this whole injustice as a cascade of consequences, each flowing from prior events and contributing to additional problems in the future. Here are some of the important elements that I see:

1. The Carabinieri is pushed aside: This leaves the investigation to be conducted by the second string—the Perugian police and Scientific Police, who are not as smart, not as well trained, not as good. They weren’t up to the job, they couldn’t handle the media spotlight, and they made a lot of mistakes.

2. Violation of the defendants’ rights: The interrogations never should have happened. Both defendants were abused and denied counsel. The fruits of the interrogations never should have been used, but they were leaked immediately and then repeatedly used against the defendants. Moreover, the denial of counsel wasn’t just at the time of the interrogations, but it lasted until the Matteini hearing and denied the defendants effective assistance of counsel in that proceeding. This never should have happened.

3. Mignini lied to Matteini: I think this is a critical event in the case: Mignini knew, when he walked in to the Matteini hearing, that the DNA results from the rape kit were exculpatory. But, he had denied counsel to the defendants, and he kept this information from the court. This is a kind of lying and prosecutorial misconduct that we all recognize from the Duke lacrosse case.

4. Matteini is duped, writes a prejudicial report: Having been successfully duped by Mignini in what was effectively an ex parte proceeding, Matteini writes a report finding on the basis of the “evidence,” all of which is now discredited, that it was likely that the defendants committed the crime. The publication of this report in and of itself was very prejudicial to the defendants and contributed to subsequent inability of the defendants to be heard by an independent and fair tribunal in Perugia.

5. Trial in the press: Recognizing that the case was weak and falling apart, the prosecution resorted to an attempt to try the defendants in the press. This contributed to an atmosphere of guilt and recrimination that deprived the defendants of a fair process.

6. Micheli covers for his courthouse friends: Micheli, obviously influenced by his pal Mignini and by Matteini’s report, writes a report endorsing a whole new slate of bogus evidence and crazy theories. He publishes a tome, which is lapped up by the press, again contributing to an atmosphere of guilt and poisoning future tribunals against the defendants.

7. Massei turtles: Massei seems to have understood most of the evidence, and could have gotten it right, but he was too weak to go against his Perugian courthouse pals—he felt that he had to produce a report that vindicated the mistakes of Matteini and Micheli, fundamentally on the basis of Mignini’s prosecutorial misconduct. So, we have a report that is partially accurate as far as determining the facts, but dishonest in reaching conclusions from those facts. The published motivation ratified all of the prior misconduct in the case.

8. Hellmann fixes it: Hellmann saw everything for what it was, and fixed it. He even threw a bone to the police and Mignini and protected them from being brought up on charges for civil rights abuses by convicting Knox of a crime for which she had already served a sentence. As evidenced by Hellmann’s recent comments, though, there was a strong sense of solidarity that existed within the Perugian judiciary and this subsequently served to overcome what Hellmann accomplished.

9. Florence fails: I cannot yet explain why and how the Florence justice system—Galati, Chieffi and Nencini—came to the terrible conclusions that they did. I find their work to be dishonest in the extreme, therefore there has to be some influence at play here that has not been exposed (and probably never will be).

10. Supreme Court: By the time this matter got to Bruno’s court, enough time had passed, and collateral influences had waned enough, so that they were able to reach a reasoned and proper decision.

 

[carbonjam72]

Hellman’ recent words about his horrible treatment by the Perugian judiciary have really clarified some things for me. I’m now starting to see this whole injustice as a cascade of consequences, each flowing from prior events and contributing to additional problems in the future. Here are some of the important elements that I see:

1. The Carabinieri is pushed aside: This leaves the investigation to be conducted by the second string—the Perugian police and Scientific Police, who are not as smart, not as well trained, not as good. They weren’t up to the job, they couldn’t handle the media spotlight, and they made a lot of mistakes.

2. Violation of the defendants’ rights: The interrogations never should have happened. Both defendants were abused and denied counsel. The fruits of the interrogations never should have been used, but they were leaked immediately and then repeatedly used against the defendants. Moreover, the denial of counsel wasn’t just at the time of the interrogations, but it lasted until the Matteini hearing and denied the defendants effective assistance of counsel in that proceeding. This never should have happened.

3. Mignini lied to Matteini: I think this is a critical event in the case: Mignini knew, when he walked in to the Matteini hearing, that the DNA results from the rape kit were exculpatory. But, he had denied counsel to the defendants, and he kept this information from the court. This is a kind of lying and prosecutorial misconduct that we all recognize from the Duke lacrosse case.

4. Matteini is duped, writes a prejudicial report: Having been successfully duped by Mignini in what was effectively an ex parte proceeding, Matteini writes a report finding on the basis of the “evidence,” all of which is now discredited, that it was likely that the defendants committed the crime. The publication of this report in and of itself was very prejudicial to the defendants and contributed to subsequent inability of the defendants to be heard by an independent and fair tribunal in Perugia.

5. Trial in the press: Recognizing that the case was weak and falling apart, the prosecution resorted to an attempt to try the defendants in the press. This contributed to an atmosphere of guilt and recrimination that deprived the defendants of a fair process.

6. Micheli covers for his courthouse friends: Micheli, obviously influenced by his pal Mignini and by Matteini’s report, writes a report endorsing a whole new slate of bogus evidence and crazy theories. He publishes a tome, which is lapped up by the press, again contributing to an atmosphere of guilt and poisoning future tribunals against the defendants.

7. Massei turtles: Massei seems to have understood most of the evidence, and could have gotten it right, but he was too weak to go against his Perugian courthouse pals—he felt that he had to produce a report that vindicated the mistakes of Matteini and Micheli, fundamentally on the basis of Mignini’s prosecutorial misconduct. So, we have a report that is partially accurate as far as determining the facts, but dishonest in reaching conclusions from those facts. The published motivation ratified all of the prior misconduct in the case.

8. Hellmann fixes it: Hellmann saw everything for what it was, and fixed it. He even threw a bone to the police and Mignini and protected them from being brought up on charges for civil rights abuses by convicting Knox of a crime for which she had already served a sentence. As evidenced by Hellmann’s recent comments, though, there was a strong sense of solidarity that existed within the Perugian judiciary and this subsequently served to overcome what Hellmann accomplished.

9. Florence fails: I cannot yet explain why and how the Florence justice system—Galati, Chieffi and Nencini—came to the terrible conclusions that they did. I find their work to be dishonest in the extreme, therefore there has to be some influence at play here that has not been exposed (and probably never will be).

10. Supreme Court: By the time this matter got to Bruno’s court, enough time had passed, and collateral influences had waned enough, so that they were able to reach a reasoned and proper decision.

I pretty much agree with all of this. What jumped out at me recently, was the degree of group solidarity in the initial investigations and convictions, and the idea that Hellman got the cold shoulder after his acquittals, and resigned because of it.

Regarding point 9, I raise the point I've tried to make in the past. Hellman said as soon as it became political (when Girlanda got a letter signd by 10 other politicians asking for an inquiry into the prosecution), that Hellman knew the acquittal would be reversed.

That shows the reversal of Hellman was probably political, and not based on the facts or evidence in the case. In other words, none of that dance with Galati, Chieffi and Nencini is actually real. It's all just Kabuki theater.

When the tension with Burlesconi subsided, they were able to fix the case again without fear of political retribution. And by the way, a lot of this is about the judiciary's on-going struggle with Mignini, how to reign him in from filing his crazy satanic sect cases, yet without letting him bring down the whole judiciary with him. Now that they can rake him over the coals with the Kercher case, they can give Mignini the boot, without giving him a chance to disgrace the judiciary any further.

Notice by the way, how many of the residual cases are likely to occur AFTER cassation has released its motivation. How much you want to bet cassation gives Raf and Amanda all the ammo they need to crush every residual case against them. I'll bet they even say Rudy committed the act alone. ISC wants this over, and they don't want it bouncing back. Case closed, imo.

SO yeah, we agree pretty much on everything, except I'm offering the political angle to fill in the blank for your "unknown influence" in point 9.

Subject of course to what Bill W thinks.

 

[Bill Williams]

I pretty much agree with all of this. What jumped out at me recently, was the degree of group solidarity in the initial investigations and convictions, and the idea that Hellman got the cold shoulder after his acquittals, and resigned because of it.

...........................................

SO yeah, we agree pretty much on everything, except I'm offering the political angle to fill in the blank for your "unknown influence" in point 9.

Subject of course to what Bill W thinks.

Go ahead, mock me. I can take it!!! BTW, I'm calling the Habs for the Stanley Cup in 6. Be advised, though, your picture in on my wall of shame!

 

[Grinder]

Porta a Porta summary from TeddyIIP:

Karen Pruett and Bill Williams shown at one point. Some flashes of interviews with Amanda.

How were they described?

 

[Bill Williams]

Dette Amanda Knox ikke vigtigt. I Danmark har vi sand mordgåde tilfælde uløste på fire hundrede år. Royal forlovede druknede og prins og mange andre kongelige embedsmænd stukket og forgiftet. Diskuter beviser og løse sagen venligst.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Sebastien Winther

As mentioned upthread, this case has only just begun. It's never been about Amanda Knox. Indeed, the information value of posts decrease tenfold when that is the sole name mentioned in one.

To come: Nencini, Micheli, the pushing aside of the Caribinieri (who actually had a DNA lab which followed protocol and routinely released EDFs), Massei.....

As Rickey Richardo said, "They have some 'splainin' to do."

Fundamentally the Kerchers deserve everything they asked for in their letter to the Florence court as it convened in Sept 2013. That alone should keep another dozen or so continuations. Or is it not important that a G8 country can have fiascos like this lasting almost a decade?

Knox and Sollecito can now lead relatively and increasingly anonymous lives. For the rest of us here in our basements at mom's house, we can tie the belt around our housecoat a little tighter now - unstick the old coffee cups from the table beside the computer and try to discover.....

..... why this mess was allowed to continue? Why Nencini was allowed to write fiction.

BTW - this is the first freshly brewed coffee mom has made for me in three years. That alone makes all this worth it. (It is a bit embarrassing, though, to be told that mom had hip surgery 18 months ago. How'd I miss that!?)

 

[Diocletus]

How were they described?

Obviously, as "Screechy McHalfwit and the Hairdresser" (well, however you translate that into Italian).

 

[Grinder]

Obviously, as "Screechy McHalfwit and the Hairdresser" (well, however you translate that into Italian).

Thanks. I'd say if they used "Screechy" somebody has a defamation lawsuit. It is confusing that they used a real name for one and a screen name for the other and I'm curious as to how they were labeled.

ETA - is there a transcript in Italian?

 

[analemma]

L’INGANNO STRUTTURALE

http://www.blitzquotidiano.it/opinioni/nicotri-opinioni/meredith-kercher-uccisa-solo-da-guede-2145715/

This fasinating article by Italain criminologist Carmelo Lavorino starts by explaining why this case is a simple matter of Rudy killing Meredith by himself, and then going on to reduce guilter claims of staging, time of death, motive, and "other"(murders) to the absurdities that they are.
The best part is when he explains how the Italian Judiciary allowed itself to be led down an illogical path because they failed to recognize what Lavorino calls a "Deception structural, which occurs when you come to the wrong conclusions because an invisible and brilliant false assumption inserted into the core regent of the fact / event that is being analyzed. "
He says that the "deception structural" of this case was the fixing of the "others" as an irrefutable fact in all matters concerning the case, which led to adjusting the interperation of every peice of evidence to agree with the "deception structural" of "others".
This analysis is both articulate and perspective and explains the cause of the whole sorry mess about as well as anything that I have ever seen.

I did not even realize that Carmelo Lavorino had already provided an in depth analysis of the Helleman verdict back in 2011 at
http://injusticeinperugia.blogspot.com/2012/07/unbearable-thoughtlessness-of-guilt.html

 

[Numbers]

Hellman’ recent words about his horrible treatment by the Perugian judiciary have really clarified some things for me. I’m now starting to see this whole injustice as a cascade of consequences, each flowing from prior events and contributing to additional problems in the future. Here are some of the important elements that I see:

1. The Carabinieri is pushed aside: This leaves the investigation to be conducted by the second string—the Perugian police and Scientific Police, who are not as smart, not as well trained, not as good. They weren’t up to the job, they couldn’t handle the media spotlight, and they made a lot of mistakes.

2. Violation of the defendants’ rights: The interrogations never should have happened. Both defendants were abused and denied counsel. The fruits of the interrogations never should have been used, but they were leaked immediately and then repeatedly used against the defendants. Moreover, the denial of counsel wasn’t just at the time of the interrogations, but it lasted until the Matteini hearing and denied the defendants effective assistance of counsel in that proceeding. This never should have happened.

3. Mignini lied to Matteini: I think this is a critical event in the case: Mignini knew, when he walked in to the Matteini hearing, that the DNA results from the rape kit were exculpatory. But, he had denied counsel to the defendants, and he kept this information from the court. This is a kind of lying and prosecutorial misconduct that we all recognize from the Duke lacrosse case.

4. Matteini is duped, writes a prejudicial report: Having been successfully duped by Mignini in what was effectively an ex parte proceeding, Matteini writes a report finding on the basis of the “evidence,” all of which is now discredited, that it was likely that the defendants committed the crime. The publication of this report in and of itself was very prejudicial to the defendants and contributed to subsequent inability of the defendants to be heard by an independent and fair tribunal in Perugia.

5. Trial in the press: Recognizing that the case was weak and falling apart, the prosecution resorted to an attempt to try the defendants in the press. This contributed to an atmosphere of guilt and recrimination that deprived the defendants of a fair process.

6. Micheli covers for his courthouse friends: Micheli, obviously influenced by his pal Mignini and by Matteini’s report, writes a report endorsing a whole new slate of bogus evidence and crazy theories. He publishes a tome, which is lapped up by the press, again contributing to an atmosphere of guilt and poisoning future tribunals against the defendants.

7. Massei turtles: Massei seems to have understood most of the evidence, and could have gotten it right, but he was too weak to go against his Perugian courthouse pals—he felt that he had to produce a report that vindicated the mistakes of Matteini and Micheli, fundamentally on the basis of Mignini’s prosecutorial misconduct. So, we have a report that is partially accurate as far as determining the facts, but dishonest in reaching conclusions from those facts. The published motivation ratified all of the prior misconduct in the case.

8. Hellmann fixes it: Hellmann saw everything for what it was, and fixed it. He even threw a bone to the police and Mignini and protected them from being brought up on charges for civil rights abuses by convicting Knox of a crime for which she had already served a sentence. As evidenced by Hellmann’s recent comments, though, there was a strong sense of solidarity that existed within the Perugian judiciary and this subsequently served to overcome what Hellmann accomplished.

9. Florence fails: I cannot yet explain why and how the Florence justice system—Galati, Chieffi and Nencini—came to the terrible conclusions that they did. I find their work to be dishonest in the extreme, therefore there has to be some influence at play here that has not been exposed (and probably never will be).

10. Supreme Court: By the time this matter got to Bruno’s court, enough time had passed, and collateral influences had waned enough, so that they were able to reach a reasoned and proper decision.

Yup, excellent summary. Point 3, the arrests and detention were never made in good faith. Mignini and others knew that Knox and Sollecito had nothing to do with the crime based on forensics. Whether this violation of human rights, and the others, will be adequately redressed remains to be seen.

Concrete evidence of the timing of the DNA profiling of the rape kit would be useful in clarifying point 3. One reason not to expect EDFs anytime soon.

 

[Numbers]

http://www.blitzquotidiano.it/opinioni/nicotri-opinioni/meredith-kercher-uccisa-solo-da-guede-2145715/

This fasinating article by Italain criminologist Carmelo Lavorino starts by explaining why this case is a simple matter of Rudy killing Meredith by himself, and then going on to reduce guilter claims of staging, time of death, motive, and "other"(murders) to the absurdities that they are.
The best part is when he explains how the Italian Judiciary allowed itself to be led down an illogical path because they failed to recognize what Lavorino calls a "Deception structural, which occurs when you come to the wrong conclusions because an invisible and brilliant false assumption inserted into the core regent of the fact / event that is being analyzed. "
He says that the "deception structural" of this case was the fixing of the "others" as an irrefutable fact in all matters concerning the case, which led to adjusting the interperation of every peice of evidence to agree with the "deception structural" of "others".
This analysis is both articulate and perspective and explains the cause of the whole sorry mess about as well as anything that I have ever seen.

In other words, there was a "presumption of guilt". It didn't originate as thinking by the police and judiciary that Rudy Guede had accomplices or co-conspirators. It started with the desire by Mignini and others to frame Amanda Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher. Then Mignini and others adjusted the case to accommodate their presumption that Amanda Knox was guilty, rather than looking at the facts of the case.