Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
We need Machiavelli - he is up on these things.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito
- Thread starter carbonjam72
- Start date
- Status
We need Machiavelli - he is up on these things.
RoseMontague
Published Author
So you did, ninja'd...You even quoted the passage. Nice!
RoseMontague
Published Author
Massei quotes a lot of the defense experts as well, guess he must have agreed with them.
The statements in your quote are of course reflections of your personal opinions. As it is commonly said, one is entitled to one's own opinions, but not to one's own facts.
There are logical and legal issues with the reasoning of the Massei, Nencini, and Chieffi motivation reports which can be detected by the unbiased reader who is familiar with common-sense logic, Italian law and Constitution, and the ECHR case-law, which is the ultimate human rights law in Italy and the other Council of Europe States. The same can be said of the Hellmann reasoning regarding the conviction of Amanda Knox for calunnia.
The ECHR has stated in its case-law that arbitrary judicial reasoning leading to a conviction is a violation of Convention Article 6.1 (right to a fair trial). The consequence of any such violation is the right for the applicant to request a retrial from the domestic authorities, with strict adherence to the Convention. In Italy, this provision is specified in CPP Article 630, Cases of revision, and Italian Constitutional Court judgment 113/2011, regarding the reopening of proceedings (a "revision trial") in order to comply with a final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2012
- Messages
- 41,046
And Massei!
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,991
Amnesty International Reports
Amnesty International's 2007 report on Italy has been quoted in these threads many times, and it indicated the lack of an independent body to investigate such claims. i suggest you look it up in these threads, because they seem to have changed their site navigation.
EDT
"Italy still failed to make torture, as defined in the UN Convention against Torture, a specific crime within its penal code. There was no independent police complaints and accountability body. Policing operations were not in line with the European Code of Police Ethics, for example in the requirement for officers to display prominently some form of identification, such as a service number, to ensure they could be held accountable." (highlighting mine)
Vixen,
Amnesty International's 2007 report on Italy has been quoted in these threads many times, and it indicated the lack of an independent body to investigate such claims. i suggest you look it up in these threads, because they seem to have changed their site navigation.
EDT
"Italy still failed to make torture, as defined in the UN Convention against Torture, a specific crime within its penal code. There was no independent police complaints and accountability body. Policing operations were not in line with the European Code of Police Ethics, for example in the requirement for officers to display prominently some form of identification, such as a service number, to ensure they could be held accountable." (highlighting mine)
Last edited:
There is, indeed, no accounting for taste.
1. As pointed out by Kauffer, the European Convention on Human Rights and the final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (that is, its case-law) constitute the supreme law of Italy in accordance with the Italian Constitution and solemn treaty.
2. Amanda Knox stated soon after the interrogation (in her Nov. 6, 2007 Memoriale 1) that she was threatened and hit by the police during the interrogation. The police have not produced any records, written or electronic, of the details of the interrogation. The ECHR is likely to infer that Amanda Knox was indeed subject to abuse amounting to a violation of Convention Article 3, prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment.
The evidence ECHR will use may include: Amanda's statement that she was abused, her repeated written statements on this in her appeals, the lack of any detailed police record of the interrogation, Amanda's sudden stating of witnessing Patrick Lumumba murder and rape Meredith and Amanda's subsequent and sufficiently rapid retraction of that statement in her Memoriales 1 and 2, the apparent state of confusion reflected in the Memoriales, the clear violation of her rights under Italian law and the ECHR case-law during the interrogation and afterwards, the filing of a criminal charge of calunnia against her by the prosecutor due to her statement alleging abuse in open court, and the similar filing of a law suit for civil calunnia against her by about 12 police officers who were all involved in that interrogation.
3. and 4. Italy apparently does have a process for filing complaints against the police for official abuse. That is irrelevant in this case, because in part of the legal actions taken against Amanda Knox for stating in open court that she was abused by the police. Those actions, and apparently other indications that those who complain receive further bad treatment, reflected in an intercepted phone conversation between Amanda and her parents, may be taken to show that the official complaint process was not practical or effective in this case.
Grinder
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,033
Anglo IIRC has pointed out that in the UK and here one's statements in court can't result in defamation or other charges except perjury. In Italy the repeating in another country of a court made statement resulted in charges being filed against Amanda's parents.
Perhaps Rose or another has a list of charges and threats of charges for defamation and calumnia etc. in this case.
This to me explains why the lawyers for the defense treaded so carefully around anything close to an accusation of any wrong doing.
Perhaps Rose or another has a list of charges and threats of charges for defamation and calumnia etc. in this case.
This to me explains why the lawyers for the defense treaded so carefully around anything close to an accusation of any wrong doing.
anglolawyer
Banned
Trod.
Italy has everything the wrong way round. Nobody ever lies, no matter how outlandish their evidence, except the defendants who are assumed to be lying and are encouraged to do so.
Last edited:
Kauffer
Master Poster
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2014
- Messages
- 2,382
1) It's not "probably wrong". It's a violation of Amanda's human rights. It's not even a case on the margins. Donnino's own testimony condemns her and the cops who permitted her behaviour.
2) The cops can put whatever suggestions they like to Amanda, but they have to do it through her lawyer. She had no lawyer. Making accusatory suggestions to anyone in police custody without a lawyer present is a violation of a suspect's procedural rights. If the cops are putting such suggestions to you, then that is evidence you are a suspect.
3) This nonsense about "a gift" keeps getting recycled. Amanda, who didn't have enough Italian, was searching for the Italian word for "explanation". Instead, she mistakenly used the word "regalo", which means gift or present. You juxtapose the arrival of Amanda and the writing of her first "memoriale". In fact, there were about 15 hours between the two events, such time filled with her lawyerless, coercive double interrogation at the hands of multiple cops and Mignini.
Do keep up.
Last edited:
A minor correction: If I understand correctly, the legal action against Amanda's parents was a civil suit for defamation filed by the police in Italy, not criminal charges.
Please correct my attempted correction if it is not accurate!
Furthermore, Amanda should have been provided with a lawyer while she was in police custody, according to ECHR case-law (Dayanan v. Turkey). This again was a violation of Italian law, because the ECHR case-law is the supreme Italian human rights law. Thus, nothing in her Memoriales may be used against her.
carbonjam72
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2014
- Messages
- 2,324
Futire trial dates.
I had thought there would be something on April 30, but didn't see anything. I saw other references to something happening I think on May 14? Others may know more.
I think Amanda's next court date is in June 6?
I'm not confident of these dates, but maybe someone else will chime in.
LJ seemed to know these dates at one point. But he may be too busy with Vixen to respond.
I wouldn't be surprised if all of these trials were put on hold until the cassation report on the acquittals comes out in or before June, since it might nullify facts that may be relevant in those hearings.
I had thought there would be something on April 30, but didn't see anything. I saw other references to something happening I think on May 14? Others may know more.
I think Amanda's next court date is in June 6?
I'm not confident of these dates, but maybe someone else will chime in.
LJ seemed to know these dates at one point. But he may be too busy with Vixen to respond.
I wouldn't be surprised if all of these trials were put on hold until the cassation report on the acquittals comes out in or before June, since it might nullify facts that may be relevant in those hearings.
Kauffer
Master Poster
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2014
- Messages
- 2,382
I blame Bill Williams in that case - the "lousy canuck" (source: Grinder, 2015).
Hello Everyone....I'm new here but I hope I have a pretty good understanding of the debacle but forgive me if I introduce stuff already covered. Hopefully I add a slightly different slant.
The "staged break in" has always troubled me. Surely Mignini and the overruled Judges are not so stupid that they believe staged break ins are always evidence of inside jobs. Of course they may be but the quickness to this conclusion by the prosecution has hints of Inspector Clouseau at work. If this is the extent of the Italian police work it is worrying to say the least. A message to burglars to stage a staged break after their break in thereby deflecting suspicion to the inhabitants and rendering themselves immune from being caught. I'm not suggesting anything by bringing this up other than ineptness by the Italian authorities by jumping to conclusions before proper investigation takes place.
I'm not averse to a little gambling from time to time but if you offered me a bet on the chances of murder accomplices unknowingly faking one of their colleague's favourite break in methods at a crime scene I'd expect to see odds in the tens of thousands to one. It's just too ridiculous for words to believe that K&S unwittingly happened to emulate Guede's previously used methods of breaking and entering. Sorry...just NO.
The "clean up" suggestion is absurd. Mignini (and possibly some of the overruled Judges) suggest Knox is cunning. However it's not cunning to attempt a cleanup of your own presence at a crime scene. It's stupid because it cannot be done and that is all the proof you need to prove it wasn't done. You can alter evidence of one's presence at a crime scene but you cannot remove it. The longer you stay and clean the more new evidence you leave to be found by police (if they do their work properly). If K&S had entered Kercher's room to "clean up" they would certainly have brought into the room new evidence of their presence. Whether they could remove more of "themselves" than they introduce is academic but to think anybody is capable of "overseeing the removal of their presence" is just plain deluded. ...or does Mignini and company think those fellows wear their white suits just for the fun of it.
There is only one way for K&S to have an absence of presence in the murder room and that's for them to be have been absent from the murder room.....or to wear a forensic experts white outfit. .....oh and try working with household cleaners and see how the stench follows you around for those around you to smell....for hours.
In fact were K&S guilty (hypothetically let's just assume this) AND cunning surely the cunning thing to do is the simplest. "Break in" through the front door after Rudy leaves then break into Meredith's room. Then "investigate" what's under the blanket and tramp your evidence all around the room and then the apartment. Then call the police. Job done.
...but a staged break in with a rock fetched from outside (in full view to inquisitive passers by) to then go inside to smash windows (which might alert neighbours) is just inconceivably stupid. So stupid that I would suggest that no such complete idiot exists that would attempt such folly. (In fact some would suggest that K&S are that stupid as to select a rock barely able to be tossed more than few metres). But it requires an even bigger idiot to conceive this type of "staging" to be a remotely plausible scenario (..and I haven't even broached the stupidity of "staging" a break in through a window too high off the ground to climb into as suggested by some of those so blinded).
I live in a country with one of the highest murder rates in the entire world...South Africa. It is absolutely common for a single attacker to inflict multiple wounds on multiple victims at a single murder scene. One person can murder an entire family (google farm murders in South Africa) in the most vicious and torturing way without any sign of resistance from the victims. Multiple attackers it may have been but to rule out a single attacker is utterly idiotic.
The "staged break in" has always troubled me. Surely Mignini and the overruled Judges are not so stupid that they believe staged break ins are always evidence of inside jobs. Of course they may be but the quickness to this conclusion by the prosecution has hints of Inspector Clouseau at work. If this is the extent of the Italian police work it is worrying to say the least. A message to burglars to stage a staged break after their break in thereby deflecting suspicion to the inhabitants and rendering themselves immune from being caught. I'm not suggesting anything by bringing this up other than ineptness by the Italian authorities by jumping to conclusions before proper investigation takes place.
I'm not averse to a little gambling from time to time but if you offered me a bet on the chances of murder accomplices unknowingly faking one of their colleague's favourite break in methods at a crime scene I'd expect to see odds in the tens of thousands to one. It's just too ridiculous for words to believe that K&S unwittingly happened to emulate Guede's previously used methods of breaking and entering. Sorry...just NO.
The "clean up" suggestion is absurd. Mignini (and possibly some of the overruled Judges) suggest Knox is cunning. However it's not cunning to attempt a cleanup of your own presence at a crime scene. It's stupid because it cannot be done and that is all the proof you need to prove it wasn't done. You can alter evidence of one's presence at a crime scene but you cannot remove it. The longer you stay and clean the more new evidence you leave to be found by police (if they do their work properly). If K&S had entered Kercher's room to "clean up" they would certainly have brought into the room new evidence of their presence. Whether they could remove more of "themselves" than they introduce is academic but to think anybody is capable of "overseeing the removal of their presence" is just plain deluded. ...or does Mignini and company think those fellows wear their white suits just for the fun of it.
There is only one way for K&S to have an absence of presence in the murder room and that's for them to be have been absent from the murder room.....or to wear a forensic experts white outfit. .....oh and try working with household cleaners and see how the stench follows you around for those around you to smell....for hours.
In fact were K&S guilty (hypothetically let's just assume this) AND cunning surely the cunning thing to do is the simplest. "Break in" through the front door after Rudy leaves then break into Meredith's room. Then "investigate" what's under the blanket and tramp your evidence all around the room and then the apartment. Then call the police. Job done.
...but a staged break in with a rock fetched from outside (in full view to inquisitive passers by) to then go inside to smash windows (which might alert neighbours) is just inconceivably stupid. So stupid that I would suggest that no such complete idiot exists that would attempt such folly. (In fact some would suggest that K&S are that stupid as to select a rock barely able to be tossed more than few metres). But it requires an even bigger idiot to conceive this type of "staging" to be a remotely plausible scenario (..and I haven't even broached the stupidity of "staging" a break in through a window too high off the ground to climb into as suggested by some of those so blinded).
I live in a country with one of the highest murder rates in the entire world...South Africa. It is absolutely common for a single attacker to inflict multiple wounds on multiple victims at a single murder scene. One person can murder an entire family (google farm murders in South Africa) in the most vicious and torturing way without any sign of resistance from the victims. Multiple attackers it may have been but to rule out a single attacker is utterly idiotic.
Grinder
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,033
Welcome but please only brand new issues
Really there is very little that hasn't been covered here except we are receiving new translations.
Your observations seem very reasonable.
Welcome to the forum, Mike.
The Marasca panel CSC may have reasoned according to the lines you have laid out. We shall find out when the the final motivation report comes out, anticipated by the end of June.
My personal belief is that the police and prosecutor claimed the break-in was staged as part of the effort to frame Amanda Knox. Others believe that the police sincerely thought the break-in was staged, even though they did not have reliable evidence to support that claim, and it was not actually staged. And some still believe the police claim.
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
Last edited:
Grinder
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,033
When was the first mention by the police that the burglary was staged? Didn't the very first officers think it was staged? If so, do you believe the PP decided from the first to frame the kids?
ETA - How do you know it wasn't staged? Could Rudi have staged it because he had asked Mez if he could come over and thought the other british may have been told by her? He then thought he needed to stage it. Not suggesting it happened that way but it could have.
Last edited:
- Status