Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

The refusal of the Marasca/Bruno panel to remand to another appeal's court is key here. The phrase you use, LJ, here is key: "the Marasca panel regards this from being so far away from a BARD case that it will never be possible (or reasonable) for any fair court to try Knox or Sollecito for the murder again."

If the M/B panel had deemed factual any of the things which the remaining guilters cling to, why then no remand?

Oh right - conspiracy. Somehow Marriott from Seattle got to the Italian Supreme Court.

The only conclusion, really, is that M/B deemed everything bunk from the git-go - in the context of not being seen to violate "judicial truths" generated by former courts of status equal to the M/B panel.

The report definitely does not give them exoneration, at least using the dictionary definition. I realize those damn dictionaries just get in the way. Damn facts,

M&B leave the door open to guilt but state clearly that at this time it is too late to fix it and since nothing can be done to repair the bungling (such as the DNA on the knife and bra) there was no point to send it down again. I agree with Vixen that it was a political decision but not because they were "bent" but because it had to end. Too embarrassing, even for a backward country.

 

[acbytesla]

IIRC Massei indicated that more than one could be concluded from the forensics and other evidence.

What you didn't elucidate was how these statements were extracted? I'm amazed that even one expert maintain it had to be multiple attackers.

Of course, multiple attackers doesn't equal A&R. M&B absolutely believe multiple attackers but said there wasn't evidence it was the kids.

Please tell me you had those quotes on file and didn't just put it together in 5 minutes.

ETA - Can't believe Itrona and Torre insisted they could tell it was only one person.

I don't believe for one second there were multiple attackers. Where did the other attackers stand during the murder? Did they hover? Which seems the only way. That the morons in robes in Italy insist that there were only shows there are a lot of stupid weak people in authority.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Thanks. I did read that at the beginning of the tome Vixen posted. I'm trying to get Vixen to say what she thinks Mignini's theory was. IOW take the above and reword to clarify.

Mignini like many or most Italians, at least those in LE, seem to attempt to make up for their third world upbringing by using large words and run-on sentences.

Grinder,
Is there really much difference between what was quoted in the transcript and "pagan sex murder"? Or whatever words you want to use summarize it?

It seems obvious to me that this is how Mignini thinks.... I am wondering why you object to phrases like "Satanic rite" being used to describe it. I don't think there is any appreciable difference here, in context of the accusations. It's not like we really need to know if Mignini technically believed a ritual sacrifice was performed or a pagan murder orgy took place. It's all an equal level of lunacy.

And besides, that was what was in the FORMAL recorded transcript. Surely you don't think that was the craziest thing Mignini stated or believed previously?

 

[Grinder]

Grinder,
Is there really much difference between what was quoted in the transcript and "pagan sex murder"? Or whatever words you want to use summarize it?

It seems obvious to me that this is how Mignini thinks.... I am wondering why you object to phrases like "Satanic rite" being used to describe it. I don't think there is any appreciable difference here, in context of the accusations. It's not like we really need to know if Mignini technically believed a ritual sacrifice was performed or a pagan murder orgy took place. It's all an equal level of lunacy.

And besides, that was what was in the FORMAL recorded transcript. Surely you don't think that was the craziest thing Mignini stated or believed previously?

You think that Vixen will agree it was a "pagan sex murder"?

In the early days FOA claimed Mignini had contended it was a "satanic rite" and that became the "truth". I believed it. But did he say it? People here will still bring it out yet no one has ever produced the quote. I don't think what Mignini said is the same thing as a satanic rite. I don't think a possible link to sex and Halloween is off the beam.

I don't know how crazy he really is. The MoF case was most likely something related to the occult, surely thinking that over the years wasn't crazy.

I would prefer to stick to the evidence in the case and not characterizations on either side.

 

[Grinder]

I don't believe for one second there were multiple attackers. Where did the other attackers stand during the murder? Did they hover? Which seems the only way. That the morons in robes in Italy insist that there were only shows there are a lot of stupid weak people in authority.

Tesla are you saying there wasn't enough room for three or four people in the room? Go look at picture of it. There was plenty of room.

 

[Bill Williams]

The report definitely does not give them exoneration, at least using the dictionary definition. I realize those damn dictionaries just get in the way. Damn facts,

M&B leave the door open to guilt but state clearly that at this time it is too late to fix it and since nothing can be done to repair the bungling (such as the DNA on the knife and bra) there was no point to send it down again. I agree with Vixen that it was a political decision but not because they were "bent" but because it had to end. Too embarrassing, even for a backward country.

If M/B have left the door open to guilt, then the Italian system is more corrupt than anyone has ever claimed. That's just a bizarre statement to make. Courts convict or acquit, because in a court setting it is the **prosecution** which is on trial.

For heaven's sake, that is perhaps the most bizarre statement that can be made, and not worthy of a democracy. It reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of what courts in democracies do - or find.

Fact is there is a good cross-section of people **in Italy** who are comfortable using the word exoneration. And no, I am not going to provide cites. You know who they are, and it has also now been almost a year since the exonerations. Nearly all innocentisti would use that word, and a good proportion of those with doubts seem comfortable with it and have moved on - with the possible exception of the emerging Rudy-supporters; and I know for a fact you're not a Rudy supporter.

Some continue with the, "now we'll never know the true facts of Meredith's death." Who cares given the judicial truth as delivered on Mar 27, 2015?

I for one am done with this continual picking of gnat-pooh out of pepper. This is about the third or fourth time we've been around this merry-go-round. I'm not done with it from frustration, because it has now gone beyond the "for sake of argument", or, "but the dictionary defines it as.....", it just so boring.

 

[Bill Williams]

LJ has chimed in. There clearly is a difference and Cheli an Italian well versed in legal issues, a long time FOA and one that has been regarded highly by PIP, made the point in his article. Nothing has been presented to refute that by anyone with credentials equal to Cheli or really with any credentials.

If you are citing Cheli for supporting "leaving the door open to guilt," then you've really lost the plot. You only quote Cheli to be argumentative, not for clarity.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla are you saying there wasn't enough room for three or four people in the room? Go look at picture of it. There was plenty of room.

[qimg]http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/meredithroom__24_.jpg[/qimg]

No, I'm saying there is no evidence of anyone else. Rudy left a half a dozen of his shoe prints whereas there are no others.

But now that you mention it, 4 people in that room is more than a little crowded.

 

[Desert Fox]

Tesla are you saying there wasn't enough room for three or four people in the room? Go look at picture of it. There was plenty of room.

[qimg]http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/meredithroom__24_.jpg[/qimg]

Have you looked at floor plans of the room? I think that due to perspective, that room looks far larger than it really is.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

You think that Vixen will agree it was a "pagan sex murder"?

I have no idea how Vixen thinks so I dunno.

But the passage quoted talks about things related to to 1) paganism (Samhain) 2) sex/eroticism and 3) murder. So... pagan sex murder seems like a fair 3 words to summarize it?

In the early days FOA claimed Mignini had contended it was a "satanic rite" and that became the "truth". I believed it. But did he say it? People here will still bring it out yet no one has ever produced the quote. I don't think what Mignini said is the same thing as a satanic rite. I don't think a possible link to sex and Halloween is off the beam.

If by Halloween you simply mean it happened around Halloween then I guess... but that's not what Mignini is talking about. He is specifically talking about erotic games related to Samhain and talking about sex games and murder culture.

If you came across a broken window and a murder with only evidence of a single perp, you DON'T think it is "off the beam" to say, "Well it looks like a murder involving a 3 way erotic sex game related to Halloween, All Saints Day, and Samhain (links to neopaganism)!" ??

I don't know how crazy he really is. The MoF case was most likely something related to the occult, surely thinking that over the years wasn't crazy.

I don't know enough about MoF to say. I just remember Mignini hypothesizing a double body swap to explain some piece of evidence rather than simply admit he was mistaken -- shows what kind of person he is.

I would prefer to stick to the evidence in the case and not characterizations on either side.

I still don't see how summarizing Mignini's thoughts as "Satanic rite" even if those were not the exact words he used in court is unfair. Seems a lot of reports described his hypothesis that way and "paganism, eroticism, murder games, occult, etc." isn't that far off (or far enough off to really matter here). And given the actual court transcripts, is it really unlikely he used the words "Satanic rite" at some point? So unlikely you think those other early reports (that say he used it) to be unbelievable? And does it really matter?

 

[Bill Williams]

I still don't see how summarizing Mignini's thoughts as "Satanic rite" even if those were not the exact words he used in court is unfair. Seems a lot of reports described his hypothesis that way and "paganism, eroticism, murder games, occult, etc." isn't that far off (or far enough off to really matter here). And given the actual court transcripts, is it really unlikely he used the words "Satanic rite" at some point? So unlikely you think those other early reports (that say he used it) to be unbelievable? And does it really matter?

Good luck, NotEvenWrong. The agenda, though, is to be an innocentisti but appear impartial by claiming that the early-FOA propagated falsehoods. Regardless of the "satanic rite" thing being corroborated by at least two 2008 newspapers, The Rolling Stone, Barbie Nadeau (who's not exactly a friend of the FOA), and yada, yada, yada...... where even Machiavelli felt the need on this very thread to defend Mignini from the charge by claiming that in Italian "riti" merely means a continuing habit.

Let me know how it goes.

 

[Grinder]

Have you looked at floor plans of the room? I think that due to perspective, that room looks far larger than it really is.

Yes I looked at the floor plan and IMO there is plenty of room for 3 or 4 people.

 

[Grinder]

I still don't see how summarizing Mignini's thoughts as "Satanic rite" even if those were not the exact words he used in court is unfair. Seems a lot of reports described his hypothesis that way and "paganism, eroticism, murder games, occult, etc." isn't that far off (or far enough off to really matter here). And given the actual court transcripts, is it really unlikely he used the words "Satanic rite" at some point? So unlikely you think those other early reports (that say he used it) to be unbelievable? And does it really matter?

I don't think one can get the full flavor of this unless one followed at the time. The most common first reports were sex game gone wrong. There may have been a couple reports later that used the satanic term but IIRC it didn't come a meme until Preston entered the fray.

 

[Grinder]

If you are citing Cheli for supporting "leaving the door open to guilt," then you've really lost the plot. You only quote Cheli to be argumentative, not for clarity.

No Bill I quote him because he is a person that has been respected for his legal analysis for years by the FOA and he wrote clearly (not like an Italian judge) that the MR as expected because of the paragraph two acquittal didn't exonerate the kids as a paragraph one would have.

He goes on to say that the multiple attacker judicial fact wasn't just given lip service but they really seemed to believe so much so they came up with new reasons for them.

 

[Mike1711]

Tesla are you saying there wasn't enough room for three or four people in the room? Go look at picture of it. There was plenty of room.

[qimg]http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/meredithroom__24_.jpg[/qimg]

To me it looks like a wide angle lens was used to take this picture. The wardrobe vertical line is off vertical. A plan of the room shows it to be tiny.

 

[Mike1711]

Yes I looked at the floor plan and IMO there is plenty of room for 3 or 4 people.

Having looked at the plan I would estimate the room to be about 8m2. Four people fighting in that space would be a pretty tall order.

 

[Numbers]

LJ has chimed in. There clearly is a difference and Cheli an Italian well versed in legal issues, a long time FOA and one that has been regarded highly by PIP, made the point in his article. Nothing has been presented to refute that by anyone with credentials equal to Cheli or really with any credentials.

Grinder,

Please explain what difference, under Italian law, there is between an acquittal under CPP Article 530.1, "the accused did not commit it", and CPP Article 530.2, "the judge shall deliver a judgment of acquittal also in case of insufficient, contradictory or lacking proof that the...accused committed it" in light of CPP Article 533.1, "the judge shall deliver a judgment of conviction if the accused is proven guilty of the alleged offense beyond a reasonable doubt". Please be specific in terms of the legal difference that actually has an affect on the persons acquitted.

If you find that the there is no difference in legal effect, but a possible difference in how some persons perceive the verdict, please indicate that as well.

Clue: There is no procedural difference in the CPP (Code of Criminal Procedure) in the effect of either of these types of acquittal, for those found not to have committed the crime, whether under CPP Art. 530.1 or 530.2. In neither case can the acquitted be retried, and in neither case can they be subject to a new civil action for the crime for which they were acquitted by any party that joined the civil action to the criminal case.

 

[sept79]

I don't believe for one second there were multiple attackers. Where did the other attackers stand during the murder? Did they hover? Which seems the only way. That the morons in robes in Italy insist that there were multiple attackers only shows there are a lot of stupid weak people in authority.

I strongly believe that Massei was told to deliver a 'guilty' verdict. It didn't make any difference as to what sort of case was presented by the defense.

 

[sept79]

Having looked at the plan I would estimate the room to be about 8m2. Four people fighting in that space would be a pretty tall order.

And what does it say when there is evidence of presence of only two people?

 

[Numbers]

No Bill I quote him because he is a person that has been respected for his legal analysis for years by the FOA and he wrote clearly (not like an Italian judge) that the MR as expected because of the paragraph two acquittal didn't exonerate the kids as a paragraph one would have.

He goes on to say that the multiple attacker judicial fact wasn't just given lip service but they really seemed to believe so much so they came up with new reasons for them.

Grinder,

Please give us your dictionary definition of "exonerate". In fact, Knox and Sollecito were exonerated twice on the murder/rape charges; first, in a preliminary judgment, by the Hellmann court verdict (annulling the Massei court conviction), and second, in a final, definitive judgment, but the Marasca CSC panel verdict (annulling the Nencini court verdict).

A definition of exonerate: to clear from accusation or blame
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exonerate

If you believe that Knox and Sollecito were not exonerated by the Marasca CSC panel final and definitive verdict of acquittal, please explain in some detail how they are not fully cleared of the charges.

Please refer to actual Italian law, not to any person's interpretation of it. Please cite the actual articles of that law that support your position.