Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Mike1711]

Are all not guilty verdicts exonerations? Simple question. Why would what Mike says matter?

Of course you're correct.

What I say doesn't matter.

Whereas what you say doesn't matter.

I have no opinion on exonerate vs not guilty. It's certainly not universal that civil cases can have different outcomes to criminal cases. Not that this matters of course.

 

[Mike1711]

It is an established scientific fact and legally upheld fact that:

Knox's blood was found on the tap of the wash basin.

So the blood tested as positive proof that it belonged to AK?

Do you accept that if it wasn't tested it can only be speculation?

 

[Vixen]

No, YOU claimed it was a gaping neck wound from the murder orgy with Meredith and that is how Amanda got her blood in the bathroom.

I pointed out that given the obviously adjusted brightness of the picture, it could have been an old scar. Turns out it was a hickey. Whatever, the point remains that it clearly wasn't a gaping neck wound from a violent murder. We know this because it was identified at most as a tiny scratch.

Do try to keep my comments in context of what is being replied to, please.

I said nothing of the sort.

 

[Vixen]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10611128#post10611128

Lies, damned lies, and hours of good lives wasted consorting with a preposterously unreliable and bad-faith interlocutor. Is this what has finally become of life on ISF?

I wrote:

No, I have never posted on any forum before, apart from Mensa.
This was in reply to demands to know what forums I was on. AIUI with American Mensa you don't need to be a member to use their forums. So, no, it's a leap of conclusion you have come to.

 

[Vixen]

So the blood tested as positive proof that it belonged to AK?

Do you accept that if it wasn't tested it can only be speculation?

Do read up on it. I can recommend Darkness Descending for a good review of the evidence in plain English.

 

[Vixen]

Deleted.

 

[Mike1711]

Do read up on it. I can recommend Darkness Descending for a good review of the evidence in plain English.

Thanks for not answering my question.

Darkness Descending aptly describes its author.

 

[Vixen]

For the record, Vixen has twice in those 4,000 posts properly recanted erroneous claims, and apologized.

Wow, I'm in shock I must go and lie down in a dark room. Thanks, Bill!

 

[Vixen]

Thanks. I can see why you didn't want to publish it

CPP Article 530 Judgment of acquittal

1. If the criminal act did not occur, the accused did not commit it, the act is not deemed an offence by law or it has been committed by a person who cannot be accused or punished for a different reason, the judge shall deliver a judgment of acquittal, mentioning the cause in the operative part of the judgment.

2. The judge shall deliver a judgment of acquittal also in case of insufficient, contradictory or lacking proof that the criminal act occurred, the accused committed it, the act is deemed an offence by law, the offence was committed by a person with mental capacity.

3. The judge shall deliver a judgment of acquittal under paragraph 1 if there is proof that the underlying causes of the committed act are either a reason for justification or a personal reason for exemption from punishment or there is a doubt on the existence of such reasons.

4. By means of the judgment of acquittal, the judge shall apply the security measures, in the cases provided for by law.

If I recall the lawyer you refer thinks 530 should be ended. Obviously he thinks it means something.


Numbers530CCP

And please note, if you read it in the original Italian: the word used in the penal code is proscioglimento NOT “assoluzione”. Proscioglimento normally refers only to non-definitive
preliminary judgements during the investigation phase, and it could be translated as “dropping of
charges”. It is a non-binding decision, and is not subject to double jeopardy. It is not even considered a court decision, but as Mike17 himself has pointed out, it is normally a prosecution decision.

Bruno-Marasca should never have used this article as it is not within their jurisdiction. However, having used it, the final verdict is: charges are dropped. This implies they can be recharged with the same offence.

 

[Vixen]

Thanks for not answering my question.

Darkness Descending aptly describes its author.

I see. So anyone you perceive as presenting a balanced and accurate description of the evidence and issues involved in the case shall be an object of your scorn.

 

[Mike1711]

I see. So anyone you perceive as presenting a balanced and accurate description of the evidence and issues involved in the case shall be an object of your scorn.

No, ill researched, biased and blatantly wrong nonsense is though.

 

[Vixen]

Sorry if you think DNA is a protein then your opinion on DNA analysis is valueless.

One cannot identify the source of DNA from peak heights. In fact if one watches the video of the DNA collection from the basin then one cannot even be sure the DNA was co=located; broad swipes were taken, the DNA of Kercher and Knox could have been separately located. It would be normal to find DNA traces of the users on the basin or bidet or kitchen utensils. There is no time print, one cannot say when the DNA was deposited, one cannot know if the DNA was deposited at the same time. One can assume that the DNA from the blood stains identify the source of the blood, one cannot assume other DNA samples are from any particular source (cleaning teeth and washing mouth out would be an excellent source of DNA for the basin). This is just not scientific.

I didn't say it was "a" protein. OK, so I wrote in shorthand. There is no requirement on this forum to give full scientific definitions every time, but here goes:

The central dogma of molecular biology explains that DNA codes for RNA, which codes for proteins. DNA is the molecule of heredity that passes from parents to offspring. It contains the instructions for building proteins, which make up the structure of the body and carry out most of its functions.

Re the peaks, again I was writing in shorthand that one can make assumptions about where a DNA sample comes from its volume. For example, where you have a murder victim with a profuse loss of blood, we can compare the ratio of the victim's DNA to that of a suspect.

It was reasonably assumed that Amanda must have also been bleeding quite substantially, given that in the sink basin, her DNA was more prevalent than Mez'.

This isn't really explained by dabbing pierced ears.

 

[Diocletus]

And please note, if you read it in the original Italian: the word used in the penal code is proscioglimento NOT “assoluzione”. Proscioglimento normally refers only to non-definitive
preliminary judgements during the investigation phase, and it could be translated as “dropping of
charges”. It is a non-binding decision, and is not subject to double jeopardy. It is not even considered a court decision, but as Mike17 himself has pointed out, it is normally a prosecution decision.

Bruno-Marasca should never have used this article as it is not within their jurisdiction. However, having used it, the final verdict is: charges are dropped. This implies they can be recharged with the same offence.

So the Supreme Court dismissed the prosecution's case.

Personally, I think it would be awesome if Mignini followed your thought and tried to re-file the charges.

 

[Vixen]

No, ill researched, biased and blatantly wrong nonsense is though.

So you have read Darkness Descending and are not just irrationally prejudiced.

 

[Diocletus]

I didn't say it was "a" protein. OK, so I wrote in shorthand. There is no requirement on this forum to give full scientific definitions every time, but here goes:

The central dogma of molecular biology explains that DNA codes for RNA, which codes for proteins. DNA is the molecule of heredity that passes from parents to offspring. It contains the instructions for building proteins, which make up the structure of the body and carry out most of its functions.

Re the peaks, again I was writing in shorthand that one can make assumptions about where a DNA sample comes from its volume. For example, where you have a murder victim with a profuse loss of blood, we can compare the ratio of the victim's DNA to that of a suspect.

It was reasonably assumed that Amanda must have also been bleeding quite substantially, given that in the sink basin, her DNA was more prevalent than Mez'.

This isn't really explained by dabbing pierced ears.

So I guess they can do away with all of those bothersome cellular identification tests and whatnot.

 

[Numbers]

And please note, if you read it in the original Italian: the word used in the penal code is proscioglimento NOT “assoluzione”. Proscioglimento normally refers only to non-definitive
preliminary judgements during the investigation phase, and it could be translated as “dropping of
charges”. It is a non-binding decision, and is not subject to double jeopardy. It is not even considered a court decision, but as Mike17 himself has pointed out, it is normally a prosecution decision.

Bruno-Marasca should never have used this article as it is not within their jurisdiction. However, having used it, the final verdict is: charges are dropped. This implies they can be recharged with the same offence.

Your information in this post quoted above is false.

From Google translate:

Translations of proscioglimento
noun

acquittal

assoluzione, proscioglimento

Also, see http://dictionary.reverso.net/italian-english/proscioglimento:

The word "proscioglimento" may be translated as: aquittal, exoneration, or dismissal (of charges). In Italian law, the dismissal of charges at the end of a trial by the CSC (or other judgment which cannot be appealed) is legally an acquittal.

_____

The CSC panel, in issuing a judgment on an appeal without referral, makes it final and definitive under Italian law.
This is clear from CPP Articles 620 through 625.

Specifically, CPP Article 620, Annulment without referral, states:
1. In addition to the cases specifically provided for by the law, the CSC shall deliver a judgment of annulment without referral:
L) in any other case in which the CSC believes the referral is superfluous or may proceed to the determination of the sentence or take the necessary decisions.

The Marasca CSC panel judgment specifically stated that its verdict in the Knox - Sollecito case fell under CPP Article 620 (L). It is a final judgment and may not be appealed.

 

[Vixen]

Your information in this post quoted above is false.

From Google translate:

Translations of proscioglimento
noun

acquittal

assoluzione, proscioglimento

_____

The CSC panel, in issuing a judgment on an appeal without referral, makes it final and definitive under Italian law.
This is clear from CPP Articles 620 through 625.

Specifically, CPP Article 620, Annulment without referral, states:
1. In addition to the cases specifically provided for by the law, the CSC shall deliver a judgment of annulment without referral:
L) in any other case in which the CSC believes the referral is superfluous or may proceed to the determination of the sentence or take the necessary decisions.

The Marasca CSC panel judgment specifically stated that its verdict in the Knox - Sollecito case fell under CPP Article 620 (L). It is a final judgment and may not be appealed.

I am sure it does mean the same in "google translate" vernacular, but as Grinder has patiently explained, there will be a legal distinction between the two.

My advice: if you want to draw up a legally binding contract in Italian, do not use "google translate". You might discover you just sold your grandmother down the river to some bedouin camel herders !

 

[Numbers]

I didn't say it was "a" protein. OK, so I wrote in shorthand. There is no requirement on this forum to give full scientific definitions every time, but here goes:

The central dogma of molecular biology explains that DNA codes for RNA, which codes for proteins. DNA is the molecule of heredity that passes from parents to offspring. It contains the instructions for building proteins, which make up the structure of the body and carry out most of its functions.

Re the peaks, again I was writing in shorthand that one can make assumptions about where a DNA sample comes from its volume. For example, where you have a murder victim with a profuse loss of blood, we can compare the ratio of the victim's DNA to that of a suspect.

It was reasonably assumed that Amanda must have also been bleeding quite substantially, given that in the sink basin, her DNA was more prevalent than Mez'.

This isn't really explained by dabbing pierced ears.

DNA is not a protein.

Your statement is absurd. While portions of DNA codes for proteins, forensic DNA profiling tests use actual DNA - STR - which may not at all encode for any protein. Forensic DNA profiling uses DNA itself and not the proteins that a DNA strand may encode.

I suggest you brush up on your fundamentals of biochemistry.

One cannot make assumptions about the tissue or person of origin of DNA in a DNA profile test based on its volume. However, contamination events typically but not always involve low volumes of extraneous DNA.

The method of DNA collection from the sink by the Italian police assured a mixture of all the DNA under the swab; the police video shows that the swab was used over broad areas rather than at specific locations. DNA from Kercher, Knox, and any other legitimate user of the sink would have been combined by the method of collection.

 

[Numbers]

I am sure it does mean the same in "google translate" vernacular, but as Grinder has patiently explained, there will be a legal distinction between the two.

My advice: if you want to draw up a legally binding contract in Italian, do not use "google translate". You might discover you just sold your grandmother down the river!

Grinder has not pointed out any legal distinction or difference in legal consequences between CPP Article 530.1 and 530.2, only one of perception.

See http://context.reverso.net/translation/italian-english/proscioglimento
for a more complete translation and uses of "proscioglimento".

It refers to an acquittal, an exoneration, or a dismissal (of charges); it may even mean "absolution".

Dismissal of charges in Italy, as a final decision, for "the accused did not commmit the act (crime)" is exactly the same in terms of legal consequences as a final acquittal.

 

[Vixen]

DNA is not a protein.

Your statement is absurd. While portions of DNA codes for proteins, forensic DNA profiling tests use actual DNA - STR - which may not at all encode for any protein. Forensic DNA profiling uses DNA itself and not the proteins that a DNA strand may encode.

I suggest you brush up on your fundamentals of biochemistry.

One cannot make assumptions about the tissue or person of origin of DNA in a DNA profile test based on its volume. However, contamination events typically but not always involve low volumes of extraneous DNA.

The method of DNA collection from the sink by the Italian police assured a mixture of all the DNA under the swab; the police video shows that the swab was used over broad areas rather than at specific locations. DNA from Kercher, Knox, and any other legitimate user of the sink would have been combined by the method of collection.

LOL I simply cut and pasted that definition from google. You can make assumptions within the context of the crime.

Amanda herself said she was bleeding.