Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

Where is this transcript?

I should imagine it was presented to the court.

 

[Vixen]

What are you talking about? Neither Raffaele or Amanda committed a serious crime. Amanda's sentence was in fact exceptional for callunia. It reflected a maximum amount more to minimize the state's screw up. It certainly will be determined by the ECHR as a violation of Amanda's rights. And everyone knows it including the Bruno Marasca court that just exonerated both of them for murder.

I keep seeing the Italian authorities dance around the fact that they know that both Amanda and Raffaele should have been provided counsel even before the November 5th interrogation. But they keep trying to say it was a minor error, and oversight but they know damn well it was not.

You don't think it's a serious matter to accuse a man of rape and murder to the police?

 

[Grinder]

No that's not what Mignini's censure is about. It was about omitting to put something in writing, by oversight.

ISTM Raff's defence were grasping at any straw (cf Bongiorno complaining about Nencini) and no doubt, looking through his case file, they could not find the note. They thought, aha! that annuls it all.

However, in his defense, Mignini was able to produce a police transcript which proves Raff was informed verbally of his rights, and did meet with his counsel.

It was a censure, because of the technical breach, and not an indictment of police corruption.

Telling Raf he would be held incommunicado until his hearing didn't really serve the law's intent. Can you produce this transcript which no story has referred to? The complaint most likely was made in 2008 and has nothing to do with Nencini.

For a law and order type you sure seem willing to let things slide.

I don't recall this being referred to as corruption but maybe I missed that.

 

[Vixen]

The issue at the CSM was AFTER arrest. The ISC said the first two statements couldn't be used but I have not seen anything about providing an attorney BEFORE the interrogation started.

Calunnia can have a sentence of up to 6 years IIRC and that isn't minor. Amanda's was increased by Hellmann to the cheers of even some here as being aggravated but it never made sense to me.

Anyone who with a denunciation, complaint, demand or request, even anonymously or under a false name, directs a judicial authority or other authority that has an obligation to report, to blame someone for a crime who he knows is innocent, that is he fabricates evidence against someone, shall be punished with imprisonment from two to six years. The penalty shall be increased if the accused blames someone of a crime for which the law prescribes a penalty of imprisonment exceeding a maximum of ten years, or another more serious penalty.​

Ah, ninja-ed.

 

[Grinder]

I should imagine it was presented to the court.

And how do you know what was in it? To whom does the law require the written reasoning be presented? Only the person in lockup?

 

[Vixen]

Telling Raf he would be held incommunicado until his hearing didn't really serve the law's intent. Can you produce this transcript which no story has referred to? The complaint most likely was made in 2008 and has nothing to do with Nencini.

For a law and order type you sure seem willing to let things slide.

I don't recall this being referred to as corruption but maybe I missed that.

Acbytesla, LondonJohn, RoseM and Analemma have all referred to this in those terms.

Incorrect: I am not a "law and order" type. Correct: I do believe in Hume's moral concept of the Golden Rule, i.e., let one thing slide and it all slides, when it comes to ethics.

Re the transcript, I read it in a news report somewhere. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[Vixen]

new high of ridiculous analogies. No one has ever contended he climbed the wall with rock in his pocket. What is you obsession with drainpipes? The video clearly demonstrated that Rudi could have stood on the bottom sill and reached the top window.

No, the professional rock climber, with strong upper body strength and climbing expertise, was significantly tall; Rudy just average height and weedy-looking. The video was doctored, with various frames clipped. We saw the tall Italian rockclimber swing up violently in order to reach the sill. Next clip, he's lounging on the sill. No clip demonstrating how he managed to lever himself up without gripping the bars for balance. Bars not there as of the time of the crime.

 

[Vixen]

Do you have the history of all cases the aforementioned judges have been involved with?

Here many judges are politicians in that they are elected. Some of out best Supreme Court Justices were politicians before being put on the Court.

It could be that people read the back and forth on this case and realized that the PGP couldn't put together a timeline, couldn't explain the knife having no blood but DNA, put faith in a drugged witness who had denied knowledge when first interviewed and had testified in two other serious cases, couldn't demonstrate how the alleged killers communicated and many other inconsistencies. In addition, unlike other labs doing LCN DNA this lab and the technicians didn't follow proper protocol as demonstrated by the ICSI's own video. They may have been further upset that the prosecutor denied access to attorneys after the arrest not to mention not designating them as suspects early enough. Perhaps they disdain from the three compatibles equals a match concept employed in this case. Perhaps they thought when a footprint tested negative for blood then it was, well, not blood. When the bra clasp test showed several unidentified people's alleles, they wanted to know how those got there as well. Maybe they wondered why a stain found under Meredith wasn't tested and didn't buy Massei's "DNA can't be dated".

If you are going to assess a criminal murder case, you should be thoroughly experienced in such cases. The Fifth Chamber - Bruno and Marasca - were not at all. Hence, their faffing about until 2300 at night, their taking well over the 60-day time limit in bringing out their written reasons, and then only a paltry 54 pages, skipping most of the points of appeal and inserting their own pleading, never pleaded by the defence.

I did predict in advance the MR would be "very short and very abstract."

 

[Grinder]

No, the professional rock climber, with strong upper body strength and climbing expertise, was significantly tall; Rudy just average height and weedy-looking. The video was doctored, with various frames clipped. We saw the tall Italian rockclimber swing up violently in order to reach the sill. Next clip, he's lounging on the sill. No clip demonstrating how he managed to lever himself up without gripping the bars for balance. Bars not there as of the time of the crime.

He's not tall. Rudi was a professional athlete. There is no evidence that the video was doctored in the part where he reaches the sill. The video makes clear that he can reach it by standing on the lower sill.

The ridiculous part was putting the rock in his pocket. There is a shot of him pulling himself up but of course Rudi after tossing the rock from the car park most likely "walked" up the lower bars and with a gloved hand pulled himself up and in.

At least you've dropped the absurd PGP assertion that the balcony wasn't visible.

 

[Vixen]

Really? Why are you deliberately omitting Hellman? And out of curiosity, how many actual witnesses testified during the Nencini's trial? No, you as always ignore the facts you don't like. But in the end it doesn't matter since Bruno Marasca's ruling is the only one that counts. It's over.

Hellmann's report was unceremoniously dumped.

 

[Vixen]

He's not tall. Rudi was a professional athlete. There is no evidence that the video was doctored in the part where he reaches the sill. The video makes clear that he can reach it by standing on the lower sill.

The ridiculous part was putting the rock in his pocket. There is a shot of him pulling himself up but of course Rudi after tossing the rock from the car park most likely "walked" up the lower bars and with a gloved hand pulled himself up and in.

At least you've dropped the absurd PGP assertion that the balcony wasn't visible.

Rubbish. He'd have had to scramble through a 50cm hole of dangerous jagged glass. Why would he do that if he carried with him a lightweight small sharp-headed hammer, used specifically for breaking glass.

 

[RoseMontague]

In Italy, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, CPP Article 104, legal counsel must be provided immediately to someone who has been arrested or detained, unless there are "specific and exceptional reasons of caution" which must be detailed in writing (a "reasoned decree") by a judge or the prosecutor.

This provision is invoked, I believe, not for "ordinary" crimes but for those where organized-crime or terrorist conspiracies are alleged. However, the wording of CPP Article 104 does not specify the type of crime, but mandates the reasoned decree.

The failure to provide a lawyer to a person being interrogated or in custody from the very beginning of questioning or custody, and use of any statement obtained from that person during that period to obtain a conviction, is a violation the rights of that person under the European Convention of Human Rights, Articles 6.1 with 6.3c. That would apply to Amanda's conviction for calunnia, while Raffaele and Amanda were definitively acquitted on the main charges.

The failure of the Italian authorities to have provided Raffaele with a lawyer from the first interrogation, and during the period of days he was in custody before his arrest hearing, without a "reasoned decree", may mean that his precautionary detention was not legally executed, according to Italian procedural law and the ECHR (that is, a violation of Convention Article 5), and was thus a violation of his rights, and thus may entitle him to additional compensation from Italy.

It may be that the censure of Mignini by the CSM (Supreme Council of the Judiciary) was initiated by the Italian Minister of Justice, because that reflects the wording in the Italian Constitution, Article 107:

Article 107 [Disciplinary Action]
(1) Members of the judiciary may not be removed from office. They may not be dismissed, suspended, or moved to other jurisdictions or functions except either by decision of the superior council of the judiciary for reasons and with opportunity of defense as defined by the organizational law, or by their own consent.
(2) The Minister of Justice may {or, has the power to} initiate disciplinary action.(3) Judges may only be distinguished by function.
(4) The public prosecutor enjoys the guarantees {of the judiciary} defined by the organizational law.

Yes, this is my understanding as well. The particular law was one designed to keep members of the Mafia from communicating with their lawyers prior to the first hearing. Using that law requires written reasons be deposited which Mignini failed to do. This is why he was sanctioned.

 

[RoseMontague]

This article confirms

Mignini would not write nor justified the refusal to talk with a lawyer, made by Sollecito on Nov. 6, 2007, at the time of his police custody. The disciplinary body of the Palace of the Marshals, chaired by the layman, Antonio Leone, considered that the prosecutor, on that occasion, has inflicted "an unjust injury to stop", because the measure was expressed only "verbally, with severe and inexcusable breach of the law, "in" stark contrast "with the provisions of dl Criminal Procedure Code stipulates that a" reasoned decree and the "production / disclosure 'to the beneficiaries.

http://www.giovinazzoviva.it/notizie/caso-meredith-mignini-sanzionato-dal-csm/

 

[Numbers]

Does the highlighted part put an end to the need of the argument as to whether the pair were suspects or not on the night of 5/6 November?

Unless the police can provide proof, written or recorded, that the pair were free to leave at anytime then surely they were "detained" .

You have an interesting point. However, the CSM may be relying on the actual arrest and detention documents prepared after the Nov. 5/6 interrogations in their censure of Mignini, as pointed out by Methos in an earlier post on ISF.

We know that Raffaele was asked (ordered) to come to the police station on the night of Nov. 5, 2007. According to Raffaele's book, Honor Bound, the questioning he was subjected to immediately directed him to "stop covering up" for Amanda. Thus, the police were implicitly treating him as a suspect by suggesting he was hiding knowledge of a crime.

 

[Vixen]

This article confirms



http://www.giovinazzoviva.it/notizie/caso-meredith-mignini-sanzionato-dal-csm/

From LaNazione (google translate):

The substitute pg of Cassation, Luigi Saved, but considered "proven" facts described in chief of incrimination but had stressed at the hearing the acquittal of Mignini, (defended by Councillor of the Supreme Court Piercamillo Davigo) considering the fact "of little relevance ", it is taking into account that Sollecito was allowed to speak with his lawyer, the lawyer Titian Germans, before the interrogation warranty.

My emphasis, in bold.

 

[Vixen]

This article confirms



http://www.giovinazzoviva.it/notizie/caso-meredith-mignini-sanzionato-dal-csm/

From the same article:

Against this address, then taken by the Panel of the CSM, he had expressed the Attorney General, Luigi Saved, which, while considering the events complained extensively tested to Mignini, make them the very important and requested his acquittal . Salviato had, in fact, referred to the conversation that Raffaele Sollecito had with the criminal giovinazzese, Titian Germans, at the time the legal computer engineer. An interview, however, came before the warranty.

Bold: my emphasis.

 

[RoseMontague]

From LaNazione (google translate):



My emphasis, in bold.

against this address, then taken by the Panel of the CSM, he had expressed the Attorney General, Luigi Saved, which, while considering the events complained extensively tested to Mignini, make them the very important and requested his acquittal . Salviato had, in fact, referred to the conversation that Raffaele Sollecito had with the criminal giovinazzese, Titian Germans, at the time the legal computer engineer. An interview, however, came before the warranty.

My emphasis in bold.

He was sanctioned, btw. Just as AK and RS were found not guilty (it's over)

 

[Desert Fox]

They need to fire their computer experts as well

 

[christianahannah]

I wonder if part of the remedy (of the now censure of Mignini) of events which occurred early November 2007 was the removal from the file of the earlier statements of Raffaele? I am not at all certain of this but have read the following from page 18.

At the hearing of January 16, 2009, at the point of the preparation of the file for the trial, it was petitioned solely that the acts pertaining to the measure for remand into custody (an executive order, a provision of the Review Tribunal, and judgements of the Supreme Court in materia de libertate) should be eliminated from the facts comprising the file for the trial.

This Court ruled in conformity with the dictate of Article 432 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

I do not know which way it directs. Perhaps someone else can make it more clear (yes, I am willing to have someone else do the work I should do because legalese is not my strong point).

 

[RoseMontague]

I wonder if part of the remedy (of the now censure of Mignini) of events which occurred early November 2007 was the removal from the file of the earlier statements of Raffaele? I am not at all certain of this but have read the following from page 18.

At the hearing of January 16, 2009, at the point of the preparation of the file for the trial, it was petitioned solely that the acts pertaining to the measure for remand into custody (an executive order, a provision of the Review Tribunal, and judgements of the Supreme Court in materia de libertate) should be eliminated from the facts comprising the file for the trial.

This Court ruled in conformity with the dictate of Article 432 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

I do not know which way it directs. Perhaps someone else can make it more clear (yes, I am willing to have someone else do the work I should do because legalese is not my strong point).

That's very interesting.