Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[LondonJohn]

I doubt it.

AFAIK the First World War started in 1924

 

[Grinder]

Why do you think that both the terms ""insufficient" and "lacking" are used? Where proof is lacking in this context does it not mean totally absent? A far stronger term than insufficient.

Perhaps I'm missing your point in this (not your) barrage. It does not mean totally absent. M&B were not saying it (evidence) was totally absent or they would have used a para 1. Given that we are working with a translation this level of parsing is difficult i.e. lacking versus insufficient.

in·suf·fi·cient
ˌinsəˈfiSH(ə)nt/
adjective
not enough; inadequate.
"there was insufficient evidence to convict him"
synonyms: inadequate, deficient, poor, scant, scanty; not enough, too little, too few, too small; scarce, sparse, in short supply, lacking, wanting; paltry, meager, niggardly; incomplete, restricted, limited; informalmeasly, pathetic, piddling​

 

[Grinder]

My reading was that almost all acquittals are done under 530.2. I could be wrong as I cannot remember where I read this....could be an unreliable source.

Look at Hellmann. It appears that he addresses 530 and 533 but uses 605 IIRC.

I asked Vixen days ago to provide any sort of proof that para 1 is used most of the time. For obvious reasons, I doubt it would be used often at all. It is akin to a summary judgment here in that a judge rules even if all the evidence is true there isn't enough. Of course, a para one goes so far as to say not only not enough but we can determine that the defendant is actually innocent (or the crime didn't occur etc.)

 

[Mike1711]

Perhaps I'm missing your point in this (not your) barrage. It does not mean totally absent. M&B were not saying it (evidence) was totally absent or they would have used a para 1. Given that we are working with a translation this level of parsing is difficult i.e. lacking versus insufficient.

in·suf·fi·cient
ˌinsəˈfiSH(ə)nt/
adjective
not enough; inadequate.
"there was insufficient evidence to convict him"
synonyms: inadequate, deficient, poor, scant, scanty; not enough, too little, too few, too small; scarce, sparse, in short supply, lacking, wanting; paltry, meager, niggardly; incomplete, restricted, limited; informalmeasly, pathetic, piddling​

There is not insufficient oxygen on the moon to sustain life. In fact the moon lacks oxygen altogether. The moon lacks oxygen. It has none.

Synonyms are not necessarily interchangeable.

From dictionary.com...

1. deficiency or absence of something needed, desirable, or customary:
lack of money; lack of skill.

Note the word absence. Insufficient does not mean absence.

 

[Grinder]

AFAIAA Andreotti is the only other Art 530 para 2 acquittal, and he was found not guilty by the first instance courts. Guess who the barrister was.

Do you mean at the SC level?

 

[Grinder]

There is not insufficient oxygen on the moon to sustain life. In fact the moon lacks oxygen altogether. The moon lacks oxygen. It has none.

Synonyms are not necessarily interchangeable.

Please Mike - what I pointed out was that parsing a translation is very difficult and only posted the definition/synonyms was to demonstrate that.

If I say Rudi lacked talent or said his talent was insufficient as a basketball player it means the same thing.

lack·ing
ˈlakiNG/
adjective
not available or in short supply.
"adequate resources and funds are both sadly lacking at present"
(of a quality) missing or absent.
"there was something lacking in our marriage"
synonyms: absent, missing, nonexistent, unavailable
"proof was lacking"
deficient or inadequate.
"the students are not lacking in intellectual ability"
synonyms: deficient, defective, inadequate, wanting, flawed, faulty, insufficient, unacceptable, impaired, imperfect, inferior​

Lacking does not HAVE to mean non existent but it does allow that - if you believe para 2 uses lacking as not existing,it could be by the English translation.

Apparently the moon has oxygen just not an atmosphere

The Earth has a large iron core, but the moon does not. The debris from the impact would mostly have come from the iron-depleted mantles of the two bodies, according to computer models.
Earth has a mean density of 5.5 grams/cubic centimeter, but the moon has a density of only 3.3 g/cc. The reason is that the moon lacks iron.
The moon has exactly the same oxygen isotope composition as the Earth, whereas material from other parts of the solar system have different oxygen isotope compositions. This is easiest to explain if the moon formed from material in Earth's neighborhood.https://www.wwu.edu/depts/skywise/moon.html

But it seems there is iron

Geochemical mapping from orbit implies that the crust of the Moon is largely anorthositic in composition,[2] consistent with the magma ocean hypothesis. In terms of elements, the lunar crust is composed primarily of oxygen, silicon, magnesium, iron, calcium, and aluminium, but important minor and trace elements such as titanium, uranium, thorium, potassium, and hydrogen are present as well. Based on geophysical techniques, the crust is estimated to be on average about 50 km thick.[3]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_structure_of_the_Moon

Lacking does allow for none while insufficient doesn't at least using our translation. However if they meant there was no evidence they should have just said that and perhaps the Italian word translated as lacking really means absolutely none.

I as legislator would have added "absolutely no evidence" to avoid a situation where no evidence of the individual's participation was presented by the prosecution, which could be the case when a number of defendants were charged.

 

[Numbers]

Talking nonsense doesn't mask your error. As I said before, dropping of charges is subject to the Statute of Limitation. Thus if one has charges dropped against one, you can still be charged again, (there is no double jeopardy if it was never tried) but only within the statute of limitations.

Please provide your citations from the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure.

It is true that a preliminary judgment of an Italian court can be appealed, but a final judgment (one from the CSC, or one that otherwise is not subject to appeal, such as a CPP Article 469 dismissal, or a lower or appeal court one where neither side appeals within the time-limit [45 days]) is indeed final. That includes dismissals under current Italian procedural law.

I am looking forward to your notifying the Italian authorities that you have discovered that their laws are incorrect and you will provide the correction. Let them know that there is no such legal measure as a final dismissal.

Or admit that your information in your posts is made up and unreliable, just as your statement that DNA is a protein is not to be believed.

 

[Numbers]

Perhaps I'm missing your point in this (not your) barrage. It does not mean totally absent. M&B were not saying it (evidence) was totally absent or they would have used a para 1. Given that we are working with a translation this level of parsing is difficult i.e. lacking versus insufficient.

in·suf·fi·cient
ˌinsəˈfiSH(ə)nt/
adjective
not enough; inadequate.
"there was insufficient evidence to convict him"
synonyms: inadequate, deficient, poor, scant, scanty; not enough, too little, too few, too small; scarce, sparse, in short supply, lacking, wanting; paltry, meager, niggardly; incomplete, restricted, limited; informalmeasly, pathetic, piddling​

Lack
1 : to be deficient or missing <time is lacking for a full explanation>

2 : to be short or have need of something <he will not lack for advisers>

Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com

Perhaps one should provide all the definitions that are relevant.

Lacking can mean either to be totally missing or missing in part, but in any case it means the supply or amount (of something) is inadequate for the purpose.

 

[Mike1711]

Please Mike - what I pointed out was that parsing a translation is very difficult and only posted the definition/synonyms was to demonstrate that.

If I say Rudi lacked talent or said his talent was insufficient as a basketball player it means the same thing.

lack·ing
ˈlakiNG/
adjective
not available or in short supply.
"adequate resources and funds are both sadly lacking at present"
(of a quality) missing or absent.
"there was something lacking in our marriage"
synonyms: absent, missing, nonexistent, unavailable
"proof was lacking"
deficient or inadequate.
"the students are not lacking in intellectual ability"
synonyms: deficient, defective, inadequate, wanting, flawed, faulty, insufficient, unacceptable, impaired, imperfect, inferior​

Lacking does not HAVE to mean non existent but it does allow that - if you believe para 2 uses lacking as not existing,it could be by the English translation.

Apparently the moon has oxygen just not an atmosphere

The Earth has a large iron core, but the moon does not. The debris from the impact would mostly have come from the iron-depleted mantles of the two bodies, according to computer models.
Earth has a mean density of 5.5 grams/cubic centimeter, but the moon has a density of only 3.3 g/cc. The reason is that the moon lacks iron.
The moon has exactly the same oxygen isotope composition as the Earth, whereas material from other parts of the solar system have different oxygen isotope compositions. This is easiest to explain if the moon formed from material in Earth's neighborhood.https://www.wwu.edu/depts/skywise/moon.html

But it seems there is iron

Geochemical mapping from orbit implies that the crust of the Moon is largely anorthositic in composition,[2] consistent with the magma ocean hypothesis. In terms of elements, the lunar crust is composed primarily of oxygen, silicon, magnesium, iron, calcium, and aluminium, but important minor and trace elements such as titanium, uranium, thorium, potassium, and hydrogen are present as well. Based on geophysical techniques, the crust is estimated to be on average about 50 km thick.[3]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_structure_of_the_Moon

Lacking does allow for none while insufficient doesn't at least using our translation. However if they meant there was no evidence they should have just said that and perhaps the Italian word translated as lacking really means absolutely none.

I as legislator would have added "absolutely no evidence" to avoid a situation where no evidence of the individual's participation was presented by the prosecution, which could be the case when a number of defendants were charged.

If 530.2 intention was insufficient it would be repetition. I will allow the Italian legal eagles more than a complete lack of intelligence than to repeat themselves.

The moon lacks oxygen...

 

[Mike1711]

Please Mike - what I pointed out was that parsing a translation is very difficult and only posted the definition/synonyms was to demonstrate that.

If I say Rudi lacked talent or said his talent was insufficient as a basketball player it means the same thing.

lack·ing
ˈlakiNG/
adjective
not available or in short supply.
"adequate resources and funds are both sadly lacking at present"
(of a quality) missing or absent.
"there was something lacking in our marriage"
synonyms: absent, missing, nonexistent, unavailable
"proof was lacking"
deficient or inadequate.
"the students are not lacking in intellectual ability"
synonyms: deficient, defective, inadequate, wanting, flawed, faulty, insufficient, unacceptable, impaired, imperfect, inferior​

Lacking does not HAVE to mean non existent but it does allow that - if you believe para 2 uses lacking as not existing,it could be by the English translation.

Apparently the moon has oxygen just not an atmosphere

The Earth has a large iron core, but the moon does not. The debris from the impact would mostly have come from the iron-depleted mantles of the two bodies, according to computer models.
Earth has a mean density of 5.5 grams/cubic centimeter, but the moon has a density of only 3.3 g/cc. The reason is that the moon lacks iron.
The moon has exactly the same oxygen isotope composition as the Earth, whereas material from other parts of the solar system have different oxygen isotope compositions. This is easiest to explain if the moon formed from material in Earth's neighborhood.https://www.wwu.edu/depts/skywise/moon.html

But it seems there is iron

Geochemical mapping from orbit implies that the crust of the Moon is largely anorthositic in composition,[2] consistent with the magma ocean hypothesis. In terms of elements, the lunar crust is composed primarily of oxygen, silicon, magnesium, iron, calcium, and aluminium, but important minor and trace elements such as titanium, uranium, thorium, potassium, and hydrogen are present as well. Based on geophysical techniques, the crust is estimated to be on average about 50 km thick.[3]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_structure_of_the_Moon

Lacking does allow for none while insufficient doesn't at least using our translation. However if they meant there was no evidence they should have just said that and perhaps the Italian word translated as lacking really means absolutely none.

I as legislator would have added "absolutely no evidence" to avoid a situation where no evidence of the individual's participation was presented by the prosecution, which could be the case when a number of defendants were charged.

.....I'm sure it does. ...but you know very well what I was saying.

 

[Grinder]

Lacking can mean either to be totally missing or missing in part, but in any case it means the supply or amount (of something) is inadequate for the purpose.

I provided the top definition that came up with Google using "lacking definition" as the search.

the supply or amount (of something) is inadequate for the purpose
is also fits for insufficient. What's your point?

Lacking can mean totally missing while in sufficient can't. It has been made clear up-thread.

Maybe ECHR has a definition for lacking

 

[Grinder]

.....I'm sure it does. ...but you know very well what I was saying.

Yes. I said lacking can mean nothing but insufficient can't, but clearly parsing a translation is problematic. The moon is lacking in oxygen but has some which demonstrates the flexibility of the word.

If you are trying to make the case that a para 2 could be for no evidence using the English translation I would agree. However in our case this wasn't how it was used. The court discussed the evidence and made clear why they thought some of it was a problem.

 

[Numbers]

...

It is true that a preliminary judgment of an Italian court can be appealed, but a final judgment (one from the CSC, or one that otherwise is not subject to appeal, such as a CPP Article 469 dismissal, or a lower or appeal court one where neither side appeals within the time-limit [45 days]) is indeed final. That includes dismissals under current Italian procedural law.
....

Here is some information on some types of dismissals provided for in Italian law. For brevity, will quote only two CPP articles.

CPP Article 469 Dismissal prior to trial

1. Without prejudice to the provision of Article 129, paragraph 2, if prosecution should not have started or must not continue or if the offence is extinguished and it is not necessary to hold a trial to ascertain it, the judge shall deliver an unappealable judgment of non-prosecution specifying the cause in its operative part. The judgment shall be delivered in chambers after the judge has heard the Public Prosecutor and the accused and if the latter persons do not object.

CPP Article 129 Requirement of immediate dismissal

1. At any stage and instance of the proceedings, the judge who acknowledges that either the criminal act did not occur or the accused did not commit it or the act does not constitute an offence or it is not deemed an offence by law or the offence is extinguished or a requirement for prosecution is not met, he shall declare it ex officio by issuing a judgment.

2. The judge shall deliver a judgment of either acquittal or no grounds to proceed with the prescribed formula if there is a cause of extinguishment of the offence but it is clearly proven that the criminal act did not occur or the accused did not commit it or the act does not constitute an offence or it is not deemed an offence by law.

The Italian text for Art. 469 was given in an earlier post by Methos (post 3830).

Here is the Italian text for Art. 129:

Art. 129 - Obbligo della immediata declaratoria di determinate cause di non punibilità
1. In ogni stato e grado del processo, il giudice, il quale riconosce che il fatto non sussiste o che l'imputato non lo ha commesso o che il fatto non costituisce reato o non è previsto dalla legge come reato ovvero che il reato è estinto o che manca una condizione di procedibilità, lo dichiara di ufficio con sentenza.
2. Quando ricorre una causa di estinzione del reato ma dagli atti risulta evidente che il fatto non sussiste o che l'imputato non lo ha commesso o che il fatto non costituisce reato o non è previsto dalla legge come reato, il giudice pronuncia sentenza di assoluzione o di non luogo a procedere con la formula prescritta.

Source: http://leggeonline.info/leggi/procedurapenale

 

[Grinder]

If 530.2 intention was insufficient it would be repetition. I will allow the Italian legal eagles more than a complete lack of intelligence than to repeat themselves.

The moon lacks oxygen...

You are saying the Italians wouldn't have a repetition? Anyway reread my response. I explained why lacking would be included and why M&B couldn't have used lacking in the sense that there was no evidence.

 

[Numbers]

You are saying the Italians wouldn't have a repetition? Anyway reread my response. I explained why lacking would be included and why M&B couldn't have used lacking in the sense that there was no evidence.

The point is that the evidence from the prosecution is inadequate for conviction.

The text of Art. 530.2 makes it clear that if the evidence (proof) is insufficient, contradictory, or lacking, there must be an acquittal.

The concept in Art. 533.1 is that a conviction of guilt can only be delivered if there is proof (evidence) of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Art. 533.1 concept is similar to or the same as that used in US criminal trials.

You are belaboring an argument for no sensible purpose IMO.

The short form verdict clearly states that the acquittal is because "the appellants {accused} did not commit the act {crime}".

One can only be found to have committed the crime if there is proof (evidence) establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Because one is not guilty before final sentence (of conviction of guilt) according to Italian Constitution Article 27, those not found guilty at final sentence of a trial are NOT GUILTY.

In this case, the exact specification for the NOT GUILTY verdict is "the accused did not commit the crime". (There are 5 specifications available for Not Guilty verdicts in Italy, including, for example, the crime did not happen, the act was one of self-defense, etc. These 5 are all derived from the wording of Art. 530.)

 

[Desert Fox]

Grinder, have you ever read an appeal courts decision in the United States?
For example, reading through Derick Tice, the federal judge does not argue that he is innocent. The judge probably feels the guy is innocent but argues instead on points of law.

 

[Vixen]

Do you mean at the SC level?

Yes, Andreotti was acquitted of mafia conspiracy by the ISC who specifically quoted Art 530 para 2.

This Article is not used otherwise by the supreme court. It is a jurisdiction of a lower court. 'Case dismissed' is strictly speaking for those cases that haven't gone to trial, i.e., preliminary ruling.

IMV Bruno-Marasca used article 530 para 2 in error, probably as suggested by Bongiorno, who also represented Andreotti in the aforementioned ISC hearing.

Bruno-Marasca also erred in how they treated a murder case. AIUI it MUST be remitted to a lower court if there is an issue with the first instance fact-finding of evidence. They had no authority to just throw the case out. There is no substantiation at all that the investigation, or forensics, was flawed. No evidence was presented to the effect that "contamination of the DNA" occurred. Italy has no sub judice laws as far as press reporting is concerned, so "media influence" is not a valid legal point on which to hang an appeal. The defense did not plead in their appeal the alternative: that even if the defendants were at the scene, it doesn't follow they were involved, therefore Bruno-Marasca erred in making such a finding. Whilst the Supreme Court has wide-ranging powers, it is actually very restricted in what rulings it can make.

Bruno-Marasca exceeded their remit.

 

[Vixen]

Please provide your citations from the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure.

It is true that a preliminary judgment of an Italian court can be appealed, but a final judgment (one from the CSC, or one that otherwise is not subject to appeal, such as a CPP Article 469 dismissal, or a lower or appeal court one where neither side appeals within the time-limit [45 days]) is indeed final. That includes dismissals under current Italian procedural law.

I am looking forward to your notifying the Italian authorities that you have discovered that their laws are incorrect and you will provide the correction. Let them know that there is no such legal measure as a final dismissal.

Or admit that your information in your posts is made up and unreliable, just as your statement that DNA is a protein is not to be believed.

When will the penny drop Bruno-Marasca erred even mentioning Article 530 para 2.

DNA is a building block of protein, so I'm am not really sure what your beef is. (No pun intended.)

 

[Vixen]

I provided the top definition that came up with Google using "lacking definition" as the search.

the supply or amount (of something) is inadequate for the purpose
is also fits for insufficient. What's your point?

Lacking can mean totally missing while in sufficient can't. It has been made clear up-thread.

Maybe ECHR has a definition for lacking

No point looking up words on google in common vernacular.

You need to look up the legal definition, which comes up with:

insufficient evidence
insufficient evidence
n. a finding (decision) by a trial judge or an appeals court that the prosecution in a criminal case or a plaintiff in a lawsuit has not proved the case because the attorney did not present enough convincing evidence. Insufficient evidence usually results in dismissal of the case after the prosecution or the plaintiff has completed his/her introduction of evidence or, if on appeal, reversal of the judgment by the trial court.

------
insufficient evidence a negligible amount of evidence, absence of sufficient evidence, bereft of evidience, deficient amount of evidence, devoid of sufficient proof, failing proof, inadequate amount of persuasive facts, inadequate confirmation, inadequate facts to prove the point in question, inadequate means of proof, inadequate proof, inadequate proof of facts, inadequate substantiation, incomplete evidence, insufficient admitted testimony, insufficient body of facts, insufficient corroboration, insufficient facts to establish the point in issue, insufficient means of proving a fact, insufficient proof at trial, insufficient verification, lacking proof, lean on evidence, meager degree of evidence, paltry amount of evidence, scant testimony, slim proof, sparse proof, thin evidence, weak on evidence
Associated concepts: dismissal of an action, woefully insufficient evidence

Source: legal-dictionary: the free dictionary (free use)

ETA See also Cornell Uni:

insufficient evidence
Evidence which fails to meet the burden of proof. In a trial, if the prosecution finishes presenting their case and the judge finds they have not met their burden of proof, the judge may dismiss the case (even before the defense presents their side) for insufficient evidence.

Insufficient evidence may even be grounds for appeal.

So, you see, it should be a preliminary matter.

 

[whoanellie]

When will the penny drop Bruno-Marasca erred even mentioning Article 530 para 2.

DNA is a building block of protein, so I'm am not really sure what your beef is. (No pun intended.)

DNA is not a "building block" of proteins. Amino Acids are the building blocks of proteins. You don't get it and you don't get that you don't get it. This is a prime example of the Dunning/Kruger effect.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk