Continuation Part 17: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Machiavelli]

You make me laugh! And I assume you think Nencini was credible? His court was ordered to review 3 items and that particularly 1 of those items would be decisive. Nencini only reviewed 2 of those items, both of which were favorable to the defense and somehow his court ruled that the defendants were guilty?

The real truth is that you refuse to use that big brain of yours honestly.

Gratuitous personal offenses normally indicate a lack of argumentation.

I would like to focus on the fact that you failed to answer on the point, that is that the putative semen stain is in fact a mini-litmus-test with a power of showing that Hellmann & Zanetti court, and the Cassazione 5th section, were manifestily inconsistent.

While I think the putative semen stain should have been tested, (flabbergasted that it never was) I don't think it would make much difference to the defense. It could only have been detrimental to them,. The reason of course is that there are only 4 possible results from that test.

1. It wasn't semen and no DNA was found.
2. The semen belonged to Raffaele. (Game, set and match)
3. The semen belonged to Rudy. The prosecution would argue "so what", that doesn't mean Raffaele was there.
4 The semen had unknown DNA. We don't know who it belonged to.

I don't think it would have made much difference to the defence either.
In fact, this is why Massei didn't test it. This is why Nencini didn't test it also.

Personally I tend to think that, had Guede chosen to have a full trial, with full evidentiary phase, then the semen stain would have had a bigger chance of being tested, maybe on initiative of prosecution itself.

But I also point out that in possibility #4, the result may have been detrimental to Meredith's reputation or privacy. Meredith is a party in the trial. This would be a possible reason to object collection of unnecessary evidence.

 

[Planigale]

What do you mean by "get away with"?
Do you include Hellmann & Zanetti among the "colluded judges"? (they also did not order to test the alleged semen stain).

As for me, I pay attention to the reason why Massei did not order a testing of the possible sement stain: because at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions.

In regards to the potential logical value of the semen stain, I am stunned instead noy by prosecution nor by judge Massei; I am stunned instead by the Supreme Court of Cassation 5th section, who decided to not remand judgement to lower courts on the grounds that "it would be impossible to fix the gaps in the evidence". I wonder how they could tell that no more evidence could be found of Sollecito's presence, as long as papers say there is an untested stain that theoretically could be semen. How could they logically know for certain in advance that the stain could not turn into evidence against the defendants? It's impossible to tell that. Also for this reason, the Supreme Court 5th section decision stands out as illogical and non credible.

Mach I think you previously said the procedure in Italy was to destroy the physical evidence so presumably it would not be available for testing.

 

[zotz]

Dr. Stefanoni has already testified that she didn't even have the opportunity to examine the pillowcase. There is nothing more to add to this information actually. No "whys" or "woulds" make any sense.
The pillowcase was not even collected by Stefanoni, btw. It was collected by some other personnell, since Stefanoni had left the room before Meredith's body was removed.
I only know there was a meeting during those weeks where Stefanoni and Comodi mentioned the pillowcase, Stefanoni warned that if they tested stains they may also destroy possible prints, Comodi decided that the pillowcase should be retained by the print analysis laboratory. It seems it has been "parked" or "forgotten" there for a while, nobody ordered further tests. The reason, as I was told was understood by Comodi, is that she delayed taking initiative in order to preserve the item, fearing that it would be destroyed. However, I think it's unimportant. The rest is your own speculations out of thin air.

What is important - that has some logical relevance - as for the subsequent events, is that Sollecito's defence avoided requesting a test at the time when evidence was being analyzed and discussed during the Massei. This I think is an important factor for why the item was not analyzed for DNA during the Massei trial.
What also is important, is to note that Hellmann and Cassazione 5th section were contradictory.

A semen stain in a sex murder was "forgotten". WOW! These excuses seem so idiotic. Why not study the prints first and then study the stain? That way the prints won't be destroyed...DUH! I guess they never thought of that. It reminds me of the excuse that Mignini gave for not recording the interrogations, that they could not afford someone to transcribe it. It is such an inane reason that one thinks that the prosecutors can't be this stupid. The problem is that they think that the defense is so stupid that they would believe this stuff. Or, and this is what I think, that they are so arrogant that they don't care what the other side thinks since everyone that matters to them will be on their side. Well, Mach, maybe you just learned a lesson in humility.

 

[RWVBWL]

About that "Thin Air"...

Dr. Stefanoni has already testified that she didn't even have the opportunity to examine the pillowcase. There is nothing more to add to this information actually. No "whys" or "woulds" make any sense.
The pillowcase was not even collected by Stefanoni, btw. It was collected by some other personnell, since Stefanoni had left the room before Meredith's body was removed.
I only know there was a meeting during those weeks where Stefanoni and Comodi mentioned the pillowcase, Stefanoni warned that if they tested stains they may also destroy possible prints, Comodi decided that the pillowcase should be retained by the print analysis laboratory.
It seems it has been "parked" or "forgotten" there for a while, nobody ordered further tests. The reason, as I was told was understood by Comodi, is that she delayed taking initiative in order to preserve the item, fearing that it would be destroyed. However, I think it's unimportant.
The rest is your own speculations out of thin air.<snip>

Hi Mach,
you quote highlighted up above kinda reminds me
of all the different theories that your Prosecutors stated was the motive that Miss Knox,
and Mr. [SIZE="-7"]Sollecito[/SIZE],
(who was due to graduate college in a couple of weeks!)
had for murdering Miss Kercher.

What were some of them again?

A Prank
$$$ Issues?
Poop in the Toilet?
Jealousy because maybe Mez was replacin' "Foxy Knoxy" at Le Chic?
or this 1:
"You are always behaving like a lil' Saint, Now we will make you have Sex?"


Machiavelli,
I suspect that havin' [SIZE="-7"]Raffaele[/SIZE] free to leave Italy and visit Islands in The Caribbean probably bothers the heck outta you,
as does Foxy Knoxy getting to chill out with her Family and friends over here in the U.S.A.

But at least you still have Rudy locked up, right?
Or are you folks lettin' him on nowadays on un-publicized public visitation?
If so, I hope that it is supervised...

Anyways,
thanks for the conversation, I and others still learn from it!
But that said, it seems that your Courts still do not really know if it was only Rudy Guede
who murdered and raped Miss Meredith Kercher, is this correct?

 

[Machiavelli]

I was thinking mainly of the connection between the judges and the prosecutors. Their close relationship seems to be an obstacle to the goal of impartiality. I am aware of the flaws in the judicial system of my own country. There seems to be a near universal deference to law enforcement. This can, and often does, lead to abuse and corruption. Violence is a much worse problem in the US than it is in (western) Europe for obvious reasons. The overreaction against crime in the US has led to an excessive reliance on incarceration for non-violent offences.

Well, one could argue it the other way around as well. One could say: since in the Italian system the prosecutors are judges as well (magistrates are all the same) they would also be more impartial themselves. In fact they are regarded so.
It is rather unusual that "prosecutors" are attacked as such in Italy, since they are the same thing as judges; or better, it is not unusual that "magistrates" are attacked, this happens on political levels (since politicians are corrupt), but in Italy such anti-magistrate opinion is also regarded as a very politically oriented opinion.
Italian Constitution says: magistrates are only one body, they are differentiated only by their functions. All magistrates (including all judges and all prosecutors of every type) are all appointed by the same authority, the CSM (Supreme Council of Magistrates).

 

[Planigale]

Dr. Stefanoni has already testified that she didn't even have the opportunity to examine the pillowcase. There is nothing more to add to this information actually. No "whys" or "woulds" make any sense.
The pillowcase was not even collected by Stefanoni, btw. It was collected by some other personnell, since Stefanoni had left the room before Meredith's body was removed.
I only know there was a meeting during those weeks where Stefanoni and Comodi mentioned the pillowcase, Stefanoni warned that if they tested stains they may also destroy possible prints, Comodi decided that the pillowcase should be retained by the print analysis laboratory.
It seems it has been "parked" or "forgotten" there for a while, nobody ordered further tests. The reason, as I was told was understood by Comodi, is that she delayed taking initiative in order to preserve the item, fearing that it would be destroyed. However, I think it's unimportant.
The rest is your own speculations out of thin air.

What is important - that has some logical relevance - as for the subsequent events, is that Sollecito's defence avoided requesting a test at the time when evidence was being analyzed and discussed during the Massei. This I think is an important factor for why the item was not analyzed for DNA during the Massei trial.
What also is important, is to note that Hellmann and Cassazione 5th section were contradictory.

Mach don't you think there is something lacking in a system where a piece of evidence can only undergo 'print' or 'DNA' testing but not both. The pillow case would not need to be cut, all it needed was being swabbed.

 

[Machiavelli]

Hi Mach,
you quote highlighted up above kinda reminds me
of all the different theories that your Prosecutors stated was the motive that Miss Knox,
and Mr. [SIZE="-7"]Sollecito[/SIZE],
who was due to graduate college in a couple of weeks!)
had for murdering Miss Kercher.

What were some of them again?

A Prank
$$$ Issues?
Poop in the Toilet?
Jealousy because maybe Mez was replacin' "Foxy Knoxy" at Le Chic?
or this 1:
"You are always behaving like a lil' Saint, Now we will make you have Sex?"


Machiavelli,
I suspect that havin' [SIZE="-7"]Raffaele[/SIZE] free to leave Italy and visit Islands in The Caribbean probably bothers the heck outta you,
as does Foxy Knoxy getting to chill out with her Family and friends over here in the U.S.A.

(...)

No, you are wrong. I couldn't care less actually. Or better, it is certainly not one of those things that I would pick among the first things to worry about.

This is because it seems I have a different concept of justice: my concept of justice is based on truth. I may have very little interest in punishment, I tend to be forgiving and lenient when it comes to retribution. Nothing can heal the victims, damages cannot be repaired. I am much more interested in truth.
Justice, to me, is truth. And this has particular value within Italian history, in my opinion.

I don't think Meredith case is over at all. Just like many other high profile Italian cases, for which victims struggled decades to achieve truth, and they did not surrender, and they won, despite criminal courts had let the perpetrators off the hook long before.

As for revenge, I also believe revenge may have a place in human life, but revenge is not achieved through justice or courts. My concept of revenge is also not related to judicial events.

As for my personal satisfaction, I would have felt little satisfaction if Sollecito and Knox ahd been arrested, I just know it is just and that should be. A much greater satifaction to me would be if they incriminate Vecchiotti and Hellmann. I have a really long list of people that come before Knox and Sollecito in my "satisfaction" list, that I would much be happier to see punished, rathr than two common criminals, just two drugged and mentally disturbed nobodies.

 

[zotz]

But I also point out that in possibility #4, the result may have been detrimental to Meredith's reputation or privacy. Meredith is a party in the trial. This would be a possible reason to object collection of unnecessary evidence.

Hypocrisy. If privacy was so important to them why were they asking all Meredith's friends about her sexual habits? Why did Maresca, against the family's wishes, put pictures of Meredith's dead, naked body on the screen in court during his closing statements in the Hellmann trial?

Answer: because they thought it was a good idea.

Privacy, my a**.

 

[Machiavelli]

Mach don't you think there is something lacking in a system where a piece of evidence can only undergo 'print' or 'DNA' testing but not both. The pillow case would not need to be cut, all it needed was being swabbed.

Planigale don't you think what should matter is the case, and that should be considered itself, not replaced with considerations about "the system"?

 

[Machiavelli]

Hypocrisy. If privacy was so important to them why were they asking all Meredith's friends about her sexual habits? Why did Maresca, against the family's wishes, put pictures of Meredith's dead, naked body on the screen in court during his closing statements in the Hellmann trial?

Answer: because they thought it was a good idea.

Privacy, my a**.

The level of this comment seems a bit low.

Pictures of Meredith's body in court, is the consequence of the fact that someone killed her, and that court was called to judge on that case.

 

[Samzilla]

What are sound waves, but vibrations?

seriously, do we need to bring in an acoustician to explain the difference between feeling and hearing vibrations?

 

[Bill Williams]

You said it, but you failed to argue it, and you were shown that you were wrong and inconsistent.

I made clear enough that the point is that Nencini was consistent, precisely because he found the mguilty, while Hellmann and 5th section were not.

Consistent? LOL! The only thing Nencini was consistent about was shielding the prosecution from it's duty to investigate evidence. You keep cherry-picking Hellmann and Marasca from the process as if it was their duty to have the stain tested, when the issue is...

...... the stain should have been tested even before there was a "defence" or the involvement of the courts! Or did Napoleoni sleep through the class on "investigating a crime" at police-school??

(p.s.: you need to stop attempting to discuss about the poster)

It is completely relevant to ask.... why are you not arguing all this in Italian at an Italian language site, preferably in Italy.

It says buckets that you would divert, instead of answering. What is not about the poster in question is this: it is useless to argue it in the English language in a non-Italian forum when you believe there has been a conspiracy within Italy....

.... to pervert justice in Italy. Why are you not arguing like this in Italy in the Italian language?

If there IS such a debate which supports you, but which you are otherwise not involved with, can you point to it?

I do not think that you can, because there isn't one. Which just makes it all the more strange that the ONLY debate about a conspiracy involving the Marasca/Bruno court is in English, outside of Italy!!!!

 

[Bill Williams]

The level of this comment seems a bit low.

Pictures of Meredith's body in court, is the consequence of the fact that someone killed her, and that court was called to judge on that case.

THIS this your rationale for not testing the stain, but it's appropriate to show her mutilated body?

You are disgusting.

 

[Machiavelli]

A semen stain in a sex murder was "forgotten". WOW! These excuses seem so idiotic. Why not study the prints first and then study the stain? That way the prints won't be destroyed...DUH! I guess they never thought of that. It reminds me of the excuse that Mignini gave for not recording the interrogations, that they could not afford someone to transcribe it. It is such an inane reason that one thinks that the prosecutors can't be this stupid. The problem is that they think that the defense is so stupid that they would believe this stuff. Or, and this is what I think, that they are so arrogant that they don't care what the other side thinks since everyone that matters to them will be on their side. Well, Mach, maybe you just learned a lesson in humility.

How many stupid lies.

There are no excuses - there were no excuses - because there was no deed.

Mignini didn't seek any "excuse": this is what I call a tedentious lie. Mignini pointed out that it is not the policy of the police detectives to record informants interrogations, this for obvious economical reasons. It is obvious that cost of transcriptions would be potentially huge (to anyone who understands a few principles about the system, of course).
But it is not a reason that stands alone: there is actually no point in recording informants statements, as long as those are not usable as evidence, and the code itself discourages the practice of documenting police activities.
On the other hand, police obviously don't like their activities to be recorded in general.

I point out a curious expression of yours: "they think the defense is so stupid that they would believe this stuff".
A very curious expression, it seems written on the part of someone who thinks that "what the defence believes" is a topic with some kind of relevance. You talk like someone who is identifying the defence with something like an impartial judge; that their honets "belief" is a concept with some kind of real place in reality.
It isn't so. The defence have a right to lie.
It doesn't exist a concept like "what the defence believe".

Anyway, as for the interrogations, like for any other trial issue, it's not a bad idea to start any consideration based on what the defence position in the trial actually was.
The defences did not request the recording of any interrogation. They did not request to admit the recording of those interrogations and astatements, and they did not request to admit any transcript of those statements. They never, never asked the judge to search for interrogation recordings and never meant such recordings or interrogation transcripts to be heared or saw by the courts.
So in fact the defence line was exactly the contrary of what the FOAs go ranting about. They did not want any interogation recording to enter the trial, they did not want anything from those interrogations to even become known to the court.

 

[Machiavelli]

THIS this your rationale for not testing the stain, but it's appropriate to show her mutilated body?

You are disgusting.

It is not "my" rationale, but it is one reason that I point out, because it exists. And you can't object: the reason exists.

The semen stain is further information, may affect her private life, and it is unnecessary.
Her body is obviously necessary, court can't rule on a case without documentation. The physical scene and the body are parts of the evidence that had been found.

In fact, personally, the autopsy report was a very important piece of evidence for me, to me that was shocking information and a main factor that lead me to a conclusion of full guilt of all three, that is all three must have been taking part physically to the murder. That was much more important than the knife, since I came to my conclusion without considering the knife DNA evidence.
The pillowcase instead, as already pointed out by some others, would be irrelevant.

 

[Machiavelli]

Consistent? LOL! The only thing Nencini was consistent about was shielding the prosecution from it's duty to investigate evidence. You keep cherry-picking Hellmann and Marasca from the process as if it was their duty to have the stain tested, when the issue is...

Their duty is to be consistent.
They were not consistent.
Come on admit it. Try to be honest abut something small just once.

And stop always diverting, away from a case-related topic onto non-case related topics, away from the points you lost to other questions, away from talking about topics to talking about the poster...

 

[Bill Williams]

How many stupid lies.

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

The defences did not request the recording of any interrogation. They did not request to admit the recording of those interrogations and astatements, and they did not request to admit any transcript of those statements. They never, never asked the judge to search for interrogation recordings and never meant such recordings or interrogation transcripts to be heared or saw by the courts.
So in fact the defence line was exactly the contrary of what the FOAs go ranting about. They did not want any interogation recording to enter the trial, they did not want anything from those interrogations to even become known to the court.

What is amazing is that you think this is a rebuttal point, the highlighted part.

How many times must the blindingly obvious be pointed out to you. The was no defence at the interrogations. Let's set aside for a moment the requirement the police had to get a lawyer for everyone as soon as hey become suspects. Set that aside just for a minute.

They were not even suspects, according to you, at interrogation. Why would people who were not even suspects even need a defence, much less defence attorneys?

Can you not even keep your stories straight? It's amazing that you'd argue against the blindingly obvious.

 

[Bill Williams]

It is not "my" rationale, but it is one reason that I point out, because it exists. And you can't object: the reason exists.

The semen stain is further information, may affect her private life, and it is unnecessary.
Her body is obviously necessary, court can't rule on a case without documentation. The physical scene and the body are parts of the evidence that had been found.

In fact, personally, the autopsy report was a very important piece of evidence for me, to me that was shocking information and a main factor that lead me to a conclusion of full guilt of all three, that is all three must have been taking part physically to the murder. That was much more important than the knife, since I came to my conclusion without considering the knife DNA evidence.
The pillowcase instead, as already pointed out by some others, would be irrelevant.

You are digging yourself deeper. The presumed semen stain could point to her murderer. It could have pointed to Raffaele! If it had, I'd be a guilter.

That you continue to bob and weave between process and what you regard as "real" is of no interest. Do you argue this way in Italian at an Italian forum? Are others in Italy arguing this way in Italian - so much so that yu can point to it?

No. I thought not. Why then argue this silly stuff here in English?

 

[Machiavelli]

Mach I think you previously said the procedure in Italy was to destroy the physical evidence so presumably it would not be available for testing.

Such procedure exists.

 

[Bill Williams]

Their duty is to be consistent.
They were not consistent.
Come on admit it. Try to be honest abut something small just once.

And stop always diverting, away from a case-related topic onto non-case related topics, away from the points you lost to other questions, away from talking about topics to talking about the poster...

Huh!? You are now not making any sense at all. Sorry, you're not.

Let's not talk about the poster. Let's talk about the arguments the poster is making, and what he may or may not be aware of. Are you aware of anyone in Italy, preferably on a publicly available forum, arguing as you do. The arguments you are making - are they on any Italian language forum, made by Italians?

It's an easy question. If you are unaware of any, just say so.