Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[komponisto]

(I am wondering if charge C) was not judged upon because of statute of limitations?)

That was the case with charge B). The reason charge C) isn't mentioned is, presumably, because it was "absorbed" (or, as I translated it in the Hellmann report, "incorporated") into charge A).

 

[komponisto]

I thought I had seen elsewhere, by a UK lawyer and an Italian judge I think, criticizing the fact that Rudy's trial was split off on a fast track. This post seems to suggest there was nothing exceptional about the process of having two separate trials. So who is right?

There isn't anything exceptional about it; it's just widely misunderstood for some incredibly bizarre reason.

People accused of the same crime get separate trials all the time, including in the U.S. (for example). The difference is that I've never heard anyone in the U.S. argue, during a trial for defendant Y, that Y must be convicted, because it was argued in X's trial that X acted together with Y, and X was convicted.

 

[Numbers]

I agree with your analysis. I think that the best hope for redress, and one which Amanda and Raffaele should pursue, is redress including compensation from Italy. The motivation report for the acquittal may (one hopes) detail the abuses of procedure and violations of Italian law and the Convention. If it does not satisfactorily do so, it seems unlikely that ECHR would necessarily find violations of fair trial provisions for acquitted persons. However, if there is an application for violation of the right to a reasonable length of trial, then the causes of this violation could be specified by the applicant(s) as the numerous violations of procedural law and Convention rights during the trials. My thought is that the applicant(s) should ask that the ECHR recognize these fair trial violations as continuing if not clearly enough addressed by the motivation report [a long shot] or, if that is precluded, for the ECHR to point out that such irregularities or violations of the Convention occurred during the course of the trial and contributed to the excessive length of the trial, and should not have been allowed by the domestic judicial authorities. The ECHR should point out that the domestic judicial authorities have the responsibility of following the Convention and avoiding violations at each pre-trial and trial stage.

If one considers that the arrests and wrongfully convicting trials were all conducted on the basis of extreme bad faith, and if one accepts that there was never any legitimate reasonable suspicion to arrest Amanda and Raffaele (or Lumumba), then the entire proceedings should not have occurred, and certainly there should have been no arrest and no trial.

{Note that the word "seems" replaces the typo "seeks" which originally appeared in the quote.}

 

[Planigale]

For me the disappointing thing is that there will be no learning. The police announced they had solved the crime using behavioural-psychological techniques. Even professional forensic psychologists would not claim to be able to solve crimes using psychology. The police need to learn how to carry out an evidence led investigation. Italy needs to have professional scene of crime investigators with training and professional standards supported by professional forensic laboratory scientists with training in forensic science and professional standards.

The most evident suspect centered investigation was the print analysis. People comment on Stefanoni, but the print specialists were worse. Reporting the footprints as compatible with Sollecito's shoes when they were not was either gross incompetence or lying. They made up a Knox sized print where there was none. The measurements of the bathmat footprint are too exactly similar to the measurements of Sollecito's footprint to be anything other than a fit up. If I was going after a corrupt service this is the real target not Stef.

 

[JREF2010]

IIRC, 10 or 12 of the police on duty the night of the interrogations brought suit against Knox or her parents.

I don't know how many are suing Raffaele, but since various members of the Perugia "pack" had different roles in the investigation, evidence collection, and abuse, I think Raffaele's attorney's strategy should be to sue or counter-sue all involved and try to split them, one from another, and get a few to talk. Offer leniency in any civil suit for damages to a few police and evidence-handlers and evidence-destroyers provided they disclose insider information on what their heavier-handed bosses were doing.

Just to have them all forced to a lengthy testimony of the interrogation would be interesting to say the least. It would be near impossible for 10-12 people maintain a lie.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

reforms are needed

For me the disappointing thing is that there will be no learning. The police announced they had solved the crime using behavioural-psychological techniques. Even professional forensic psychologists would not claim to be able to solve crimes using psychology. The police need to learn how to carry out an evidence led investigation. Italy needs to have professional scene of crime investigators with training and professional standards supported by professional forensic laboratory scientists with training in forensic science and professional standards.

The most evident suspect centered investigation was the print analysis. People comment on Stefanoni, but the print specialists were worse. Reporting the footprints as compatible with Sollecito's shoes when they were not was either gross incompetence or lying. They made up a Knox sized print where there was none. The measurements of the bathmat footprint are too exactly similar to the measurements of Sollecito's footprint to be anything other than a fit up. If I was going after a corrupt service this is the real target not Stef.

Planigale,

Great post. If the Italian authorities make no changes in discovery laws and the culture of "to get along, go along" in the police, then this case will just be a one-off reversal of a miscarriage of justice.

 

[Bill Williams]

For me the disappointing thing is that there will be no learning. The police announced they had solved the crime using behavioural-psychological techniques. Even professional forensic psychologists would not claim to be able to solve crimes using psychology. The police need to learn how to carry out an evidence led investigation. Italy needs to have professional scene of crime investigators with training and professional standards supported by professional forensic laboratory scientists with training in forensic science and professional standards.

The most evident suspect centered investigation was the print analysis. People comment on Stefanoni, but the print specialists were worse. Reporting the footprints as compatible with Sollecito's shoes when they were not was either gross incompetence or lying. They made up a Knox sized print where there was none. The measurements of the bathmat footprint are too exactly similar to the measurements of Sollecito's footprint to be anything other than a fit up. If I was going after a corrupt service this is the real target not Stef.

The only point of lying about the shoe print, was if they never thought it would make trial. The only way it would not make trial is if Raffaele threw Amanda under a bus.

........ or, if Raffaele called their bluff and said to himself, "What do I have to do with ANY of this?" And then decided simply to tell the truth for as long as he needed to before the Italian judiciary threw in the towel. Then they'd have to drop the shoe and go back to get DNA evidence from an unsealed room.

 

[Numbers]

Planigale,

Great post. If the Italian authorities make no changes in discovery laws and the culture of "to get along, go along" in the police, then this case will just be a one-off reversal of a miscarriage of justice.

It is possible that the CSC decided to acquit simply to avoid the murder/rape case against Amanda and Raffaele reaching the ECHR. The "authoritarians" and the "rationalists" may have agreed to the acquittal, at least in part, to protect not only the police and their shoddy methods but also the arbitrary despotism of the judges. The acquittal may slow down any drive for reform of the Italian police-judicial system.

 

[carbonjam72]

It is possible that the CSC decided to acquit simply to avoid the murder/rape case against Amanda and Raffaele reaching the ECHR. The "authoritarians" and the "rationalists" may have agreed to the acquittal, at least in part, to protect not only the police and their shoddy methods but also the arbitrary despotism of the judges. The acquittal may slow down any drive for reform of the Italian police-judicial system.

WHy can't the judges have just done their jobs, and done the right thing? Why can't they just be honestly angry that the prosecutor appeared before them and said with a straight face that they engaged in a selective clean-up of DNA, fingerprints and footprints in wet blood, leaving behind only evidence of Rudy Guede?

Why must all Italian judges be deemed to be brutish idiots? Just because a few of them seem to have been?

I think the cynicism is a bit thick in this regard. They could just be honorable competent people glad to have the chance to straighten out Mignini's mess.

Seems unsupported conjecture to start slinging around terms like, 'afraid of the ECHR', as though they are incapable of acting from noble purposes. Just MOO.

 

[Numbers]

WHy can't the judges have just done their jobs, and done the right thing? Why can't they just be honestly angry that the prosecutor appeared before them and said with a straight face that they engaged in a selective clean-up of DNA, fingerprints and footprints in wet blood, leaving behind only evidence of Rudy Guede?

Why must all Italian judges be deemed to be brutish idiots? Just because a few of them seem to have been?

I think the cynicism is a bit thick in this regard. They could just be honorable competent people glad to have the chance to straighten out Mignini's mess.

Seems unsupported conjecture to start slinging around terms like, 'afraid of the ECHR', as though they are incapable of acting from noble purposes. Just MOO.

Note that I began the post with "it is possible" not "it is certain". I hope that each of the judges made the decision to acquit for reasons of justice only. But those who have followed this case can, I believe, be rightfully suspicious of the Italian judicial system and the impartiality of the judges. If the final CSC motivation report gives a fair accounting of what has transpired in this case, including an acknowledgement of the violations of Italian law and Constitution, and ECHR case-law, my opinion of the judges' character and intent will rise to a high level. Until the MR is published, I will be open to varying interpretations (held simultaneously) of why the judges came to the right decision.

 

[Grinder]

Cherry on top is too weak IMO. But it will vary from case to case and will rarely be (hard to imagine it ever being) the sole evidence. The arguments about motive in this case are so fierce not necessarily because they decide the case but because of the inconvenience to the PGPs of the apparent niceness (for want of a better word) of A & R. So they launch in with the noise ticket, 'hazing', manga, knife collection and inappropriate behaviour and the defenders parry in familiar fashion, but this is a timeline, DNA, eye witness, footprint and luminol case.

Peterson is locked in by one coincidence too many, especially the one where Laci and foetus bob up more or less where he went fishing. The motive is very handy in rounding off the picture. The case would be a puzzle without it. Would you still convict him in that case?

I don't think without motive and the girlfriend I could convict on the trip and concrete. I think having a motive is much more powerful for conviction than lacking an apparent one is for acquittal

 

[platonov]

It is possible that the CSC decided to acquit simply to avoid the murder/rape case against Amanda and Raffaele reaching the ECHR. The "authoritarians" and the "rationalists" may have agreed to the acquittal, at least in part, to protect not only the police and their shoddy methods but also the arbitrary despotism of the judges. The acquittal may slow down any drive for reform of the Italian police-judicial system.

Yea, it’s ‘possible’
It’s also ‘possible’ that my phone isn’t ringing right now because the ghost of Timoshenko and Krystyna Feldmai are both dialing simultaneously & thus tying up the line while Holly Hunter is trying to get through.

Just not very likely.

 

[Desert Fox]

Yea, it’s ‘possible’
It’s also ‘possible’ that my phone isn’t ringing right now because the ghost of Timoshenko and Krystyna Feldmai are both dialing simultaneously & thus tying up the line while Holly Hunter is trying to get through.

Just not very likely.

So it is you position that the ISC is just doing the right thing and that they are both completely innocent? Maybe we can get along after all

 

[platonov]

So it is you position that the ISC is just doing the right thing and that they are both completely innocent? Maybe we can get along after all

That's also possible.
In fact equally possible.

ETA The correct term is 'totally innocent'

 

[toto]

That's also possible.
In fact equally possible.

ETA The correct term is 'totally innocent'

As a matter of interest, if it wasn't for political reasons, or for reasons of there being no plausible evidence, then why do you think they were acquitted?

 

[MDDVS]

What's the difference between complete and total?

 

[Desert Fox]

As a matter of interest, if it wasn't for political reasons, or for reasons of there being no plausible evidence, then why do you think they were acquitted?

My opinion is actually both

 

[acbytesla]

What's the difference between complete and total?

Absolutely nothing.

 

[Planigale]

The only point of lying about the shoe print, was if they never thought it would make trial. The only way it would not make trial is if Raffaele threw Amanda under a bus.

........ or, if Raffaele called their bluff and said to himself, "What do I have to do with ANY of this?" And then decided simply to tell the truth for as long as he needed to before the Italian judiciary threw in the towel. Then they'd have to drop the shoe and go back to get DNA evidence from an unsealed room.

I think Sollecito was lucky. He was lucky because Guede kept the shoe box of the trainers he wore at the time. He was lucky that his family had the resources to find a matching shoe, and to employ a forensic expert to demonstrate and justify that the shoe print did not fit Sollecito's trainers but did the trainer's from the box found in Guede's room. I think the print specialist's did not expect to be challenged. I think they looked for evidence against Sollecito and Knox and they saw what they wanted to see. They had no interest in looking carefully to exclude Sollecito's shoes from making the print.

As has been said when the police found this evidence had been disproved they hurriedly went out to find more with the second sweep of the flat when they 'found' the missing bra fastener.

 

[Planigale]

Yea, it’s ‘possible’
It’s also ‘possible’ that my phone isn’t ringing right now because the ghost of Timoshenko and Krystyna Feldmai are both dialing simultaneously & thus tying up the line while Holly Hunter is trying to get through.

Just not very likely.

Sometimes the obvious answer is the correct one. They acquitted because Knox and Sollecito had nothing to do with the murder.