Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

Looks like Amanda has more judges on the mafia payroll.

Many a true word said in jest.

It's a pity the judge failed to mention Mez' right to enjoy the sanctity of her own room without being mercilessly restrained, assaulted, tortured, violated and slain by drug-fueled psychopaths who told police lie after lie and refused to testify in court to explain their behaviour.

 

[acbytesla]

I am the bearer of great news! ( sorry to interrupt your flow Vixen)

The motivation report re the police slander charge has been released and the article link and translation below, explains enough that we can see it must be painful reading for all concerned in Perugia.

https://goo.gl/8Hbgmc

Wow!!!! This judge absolutely slammed the police. He basically said the police were lying.

"All records and statements provided voluntarily to prosecutor are very short for assets hour durations in some cases; this approximation ended inevitably does not faithfully represent the activity carried out in its details."

Such a simple and obvious explanation.

The judge is convinced that the Seattle student "has indicated in Lumumba the perpetrator only because at that time, having those who were questioning, insisted on explanation of the message sent to him, appeared to her as the shortest and easy way to put an end to the situation as it was. "

I love this.

No evidence "for investigatory choices led nell'imputata the conviction to have suffered a planned investigative action vexatious and unjust.

What a great smackdown!

How you gonna spin this one Vixen? I hate to get cocky, but this leads me to believe the ECHR will smack them down as well.

 

[bagels]

Many a true word said in jest.

It's a pity the judge failed to mention Mez' right to enjoy the sanctity of her own room without being mercilessly restrained, assaulted, tortured, violated and slain

But the killer that violated Meredith's right to life was arrested, convicted, and sentenced for his crimes? Although I agree the sentence was far too lenient. It would have been life without parole in most states here.

 

[acbytesla]

Many a true word said in jest.

It's a pity the judge failed to mention Mez' right to enjoy the sanctity of her own room without being mercilessly restrained, assaulted, tortured, violated and slain by drug-fueled psychopaths who told police lie after lie and refused to testify in court to explain their behaviour.

Sad that some people refused to accept what should be obvious. That Rudy almost certainly alone murdered Meredith probably surprised in the commission of another burglary. The evidence of that is truly overwhelming and convincing to anyone who is not delusional.

Another judge sees the interrogation for what it was. A sham that was illegal and unethical.

 

[Vixen]

Wow!!!! This judge absolutely slammed the police. He basically said the police were lying.



Such a simple and obvious explanation.



I love this.



What a great smackdown!

How you gonna spin this one Vixen? I hate to get cocky, but this leads me to believe the ECHR will smack them down as well.

Having rightfully been convicted of calunnia for falsely accusing Patrick of rape and murder, and as finalised by the supreme court, I tend to agree with Andrea Vogt that the police should have just left it there. The charges against the parents and Amanda for accusing the police of intimidation are "side shows".

I do, whoever, agree with the charges against Raff and Amanda brought against their respective books as this did seek to subvert justice whilst at the same time seeking financial gain from crime.

Courts never like cases that seem to have been brought out of vindictiveness and I guess that's how the police charges appeared, although I can well understand the police indignation at been labelled less than professional.

They deserve our congratulations in their excellent work in this case.

 

[LondonJohn]

But the killer that violated Meredith's right to life was arrested, convicted, and sentenced for his crimes? Although I agree the sentence was far too lenient. It would have been life without parole in most states here.

Indeed. And Vixen still appears unable or unwilling to comprehend that a) there's not one shred of credible, reliable evidence pointing to the involvement of Knox or Sollecito, b) Knox and Sollecito were (correctly and safely) acquitted by the Italian criminal justice system - albeit following a dreadfully flawed trial process which wrongly incarcerated them for many years, c) it's a near certainty that neither Knox nor Sollecito had anything whatsoever to do with Kercher's murder, and d) even regardless of all the above, there is zero evidence to suggest that Knox or Sollecito are "psychopaths", and zero evidence to suggest that they were using any drugs other than alcohol and marijuana/cannabis around the time of Kercher's murder (in keeping with probably well over 50% of the student population of Perugia at that time, including Meredith Kercher.......)

These outbursts are getting more and more desperate and bitter. Fascinating to watch though.

 

[LondonJohn]

Having rightfully been convicted of calunnia for falsely accusing Patrick of rape and murder, and as finalised by the supreme court, I tend to agree with Andrea Vogt that the police should have just left it there. The charges against the parents and Amanda for accusing the police of intimidation are "side shows".

I do, whoever, agree with the charges against Raff and Amanda brought against their respective books as this did seek to subvert justice whilst at the same time seeking financial gain from crime.

Courts never like cases that seem to have been brought out of vindictiveness and I guess that's how the police charges appeared, although I can well understand the police indignation at been labelled less than professional.

They deserve our congratulations in their excellent work in this case.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Baghdad Bob lives to fight another day

Fortunately the ECHR will almost certainly sort out the nasty mess made by Italy in the matter of Knox's criminal slander conviction.

 

[Vixen]

Sad that some people refused to accept what should be obvious. That Rudy almost certainly alone murdered Meredith probably surprised in the commission of another burglary. The evidence of that is truly overwhelming and convincing to anyone who is not delusional.

Another judge sees the interrogation for what it was. A sham that was illegal and unethical.

The evidence does not point to Rudy killing alone. It is a legal fact Rudy did not wield the fatal wound and that there were multiple attackers, one or several of whom returned to stage a burglary and rape scene.

Bruno-Marasca confirm Amanda was present at the scene of the murder and that Raff was almost certainly there with her. They were not found innocent and exonerated under Section 530 para 1, they were acquitted because of "insufficient evidence" Section 530 para 2, the equivalent of "not proven", although Amanda DID wash off Mez' blood from her person and covered up for Rudy. (Binding ruling.)

 

[LondonJohn]

530.2 is not the equivalent of "not proven". It's the equivalent of the E&W (and US) "not guilty", with the caveat that a small subset of the E&W "not guilty" (where acquittal comes about either because the defendant can prove innocence or because the court decides that no crime was committed) is shifted over to 530.1.

But carry on with the fantasy! It's very entertaining

 

[Mr Fied]

Quote:

"All records and statements provided voluntarily to prosecutor are very short for assets hour durations in some cases; this approximation ended inevitably does not faithfully represent the activity carried out in its details."

I'm glad this has finally been brought up.

This is one of my bugbears about the interrogation.

Guede's interview with Mignini of March 26 2008 lasted approx. 3 1/2 hours and resulted in 115 pages of transcript.

Knox's all nighter resulted in a couple of paragraphs.

How could anyone believe nothing dodgy went on before the police got the couple of tidbits they wanted?

 

[Vixen]

530.2 is not the equivalent of "not proven". It's the equivalent of the E&W (and US) "not guilty", with the caveat that a small subset of the E&W "not guilty" (where acquittal comes about either because the defendant can prove innocence or because the court decides that no crime was committed) is shifted over to 530.1.

But carry on with the fantasy! It's very entertaining

It is not a "small subset" it is a section in its own right. Section 530.1 has four or five subsets, including "no crime committed".

Section 530.2 is a "not proven", because of "insufficient evidence" which is commonly used in preliminary cases where the judge rules the prrosecuton has failed to present a strong enough case for prosecution.

The only occasion it has been used by a supreme court has been regarding political activist trials where the crime happened, but the court are not convinced the right persons were charged: rather like the Guildford Four in the UK, pre-recent times, Andreotti, former lead politician and Berlusconi when the main witness was a friend of his who said he didn't do it (later found to have been bribed to say this).

Bruno-Marasca acquitted on the grounds of "flawed investigation" and "media attention", not because of any belief in the defendant's innocence and lack of involvement, in fact, on the contrary.

 

[Mr Fied]

The evidence does not point to Rudy killing alone. It is a legal fact Rudy did not wield the fatal wound and that there were multiple attackers, one or several of whom returned to stage a burglary and rape scene.

Bruno-Marasca confirm Amanda was present at the scene of the murder and that Raff was almost certainly there with her. They were not found innocent and exonerated under Section 530 para 1, they were acquitted because of "insufficient evidence" Section 530 para 2, the equivalent of "not proven", although Amanda DID wash off Mez' blood from her person and covered up for Rudy. (Binding ruling.)

How many more times?

Insufficient evidence is exactly the same as not guilty is exactly the same as innocent.

If you are charged with an offence, the case goes to court, you are presumed innocent unless proven guilty, you are found not guilty, then obviously the evidence was not sufficient to convict, i.e. the evidence was insufficient, you are innocent.



exonerateverb
past tense: exonerated; past participle: exonerated
1.
(of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing.
"an inquiry exonerated those involved"
synonyms: absolve, clear, acquit, declare innocent, find innocent, pronounce not guilty, discharge

p.s. Amanda did not wash Meredith's blood from her. Even if guilty this could never be proven, so it just goes to show what an embarrassment these judicial facts are.

 

[LondonJohn]

Quote:

"All records and statements provided voluntarily to prosecutor are very short for assets hour durations in some cases; this approximation ended inevitably does not faithfully represent the activity carried out in its details."

I'm glad this has finally been brought up.

This is one of my bugbears about the interrogation.

Guede's interview with Mignini of March 26 2008 lasted approx. 3 1/2 hours and resulted in 115 pages of transcript.

Knox's all nighter resulted in a couple of paragraphs.

How could anyone believe nothing dodgy went on before the police got the couple of tidbits they wanted?

Absolutely correct.

It's encouraging that this court appears to have seen the reality of the situation: Knox's "confession/accusation" was improperly (and very probably unlawfully) coerced by the police, who had a carefully constructed agenda to force a confession in order to support their already-formulated belief that Knox was involved in the murder at some level. As you and the court point out, it's very difficult to explain the absence of even a written record of Knox's multi-hour interrogation that night, unless one concludes that the interrogation largely consisted of content that the police actively did not want to have recorded for posterity.

And when you add in the mendacious and deliberately-orchestrated actions of Mignini in eliciting the "spontaneous declaration", and the consistent lies and misdirections of the police and Mignini when under scrutiny about what happened that night, you get a pretty toxic cesspit of police and prosecutor misconduct. Let's just hope they get their proper comeuppance (which would hopefully also act as a deterrent to others in the future), and that lessons are learned and implemented.

 

[Annella]

Absolutely correct.

It's encouraging that this court appears to have seen the reality of the situation: Knox's "confession/accusation" was improperly (and very probably unlawfully) coerced by the police, who had a carefully constructed agenda to force a confession in order to support their already-formulated belief that Knox was involved in the murder at some level. As you and the court point out, it's very difficult to explain the absence of even a written record of Knox's multi-hour interrogation that night, unless one concludes that the interrogation largely consisted of content that the police actively did not want to have recorded for posterity.

And when you add in the mendacious and deliberately-orchestrated actions of Mignini in eliciting the "spontaneous declaration", and the consistent lies and misdirections of the police and Mignini when under scrutiny about what happened that night, you get a pretty toxic cesspit of police and prosecutor misconduct. Let's just hope they get their proper comeuppance (which would hopefully also act as a deterrent to others in the future), and that lessons are learned and implemented.

You have to wonder if there is any recourse for Amanda to bring charges against the Police involved.

 

[bagels]

The evidence does not point to Rudy killing alone. It is a legal fact Rudy did not wield the fatal wound and that there were multiple attackers, one or several of whom returned to stage a burglary and rape scene.

Bruno-Marasca confirm Amanda was present at the scene of the murder and that Raff was almost certainly there with her. They were not found innocent and exonerated under Section 530 para 1, they were acquitted because of "insufficient evidence" Section 530 para 2, the equivalent of "not proven", although Amanda DID wash off Mez' blood from her person and covered up for Rudy. (Binding ruling.)

Why do PGP think PIP would care what M&B confirmed? Massei confirmed Amanda carried a medieval broadsword across town stuffed into her purse and used it to slice Meredith's neck open in just a way that the wound resembled a stab from a small penknife, and then she rested the giant claymore on the bedsheet where it left an imprint of a small penknife, and then she packed it back into her purse and took it home and sliced bread with it. Do you think PIP believe that actually happened?

 

[LondonJohn]

It is not a "small subset" it is a section in its own right. Section 530.1 has four or five subsets, including "no crime committed".

Section 530.2 is a "not proven", because of "insufficient evidence" which is commonly used in preliminary cases where the judge rules the prrosecuton has failed to present a strong enough case for prosecution.

The only occasion it has been used by a supreme court has been regarding political activist trials where the crime happened, but the court are not convinced the right persons were charged: rather like the Guildford Four in the UK, pre-recent times, Andreotti, former lead politician and Berlusconi when the main witness was a friend of his who said he didn't do it (later found to have been bribed to say this).

Bruno-Marasca acquitted on the grounds of "flawed investigation" and "media attention", not because of any belief in the defendant's innocence and lack of involvement, in fact, on the contrary.

*sigh*

530.2 is not equivalent to "not proven". It covers everything from zero evidence of guilt right up to evidence just falling short of proof BARD. So, I repeat, it's equivalent to "not guilty", except for the fact that if one were found not guilty in E&W on account of either a) being able to PROVE your factual innocence, or b) the court determining that no crime even took place, that would be a 530.1 Italian acquittal.

But obviously you're going to carry on promoting the myth that 530.2 is equivalent to "not proven", because it's central to your need to believe that Knox and Sollecito really were involved in the murder, and that they "got away with it" on account of there just not being quite enough evidence to convict to the BARD standard. Which is fine I guess - there are plenty of people who steadfastly stick to the belief that Thermite brought down the Twin Towers in NYC and that the Moon Landings were filmed in a California TV studio

 

[Vixen]

How many more times?

Insufficient evidence is exactly the same as not guilty is exactly the same as innocent.

If you are charged with an offence, the case goes to court, you are presumed innocent unless proven guilty, you are found not guilty, then obviously the evidence was not sufficient to convict, i.e. the evidence was insufficient, you are innocent.



exonerateverb
past tense: exonerated; past participle: exonerated
1.
(of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing.
"an inquiry exonerated those involved"
synonyms: absolve, clear, acquit, declare innocent, find innocent, pronounce not guilty, discharge

p.s. Amanda did not wash Meredith's blood from her. Even if guilty this could never be proven, so it just goes to show what an embarrassment these judicial facts are.

Unfortunately for Amanda, the forensic evidence shows she did. For example, Mez blood in the bidet was diluted with water and mixed with Amanda (and it was not menstrual).

I'll get in my listening pose whilst you explain to me how that happened.

 

[Vixen]

Absolutely correct.

It's encouraging that this court appears to have seen the reality of the situation: Knox's "confession/accusation" was improperly (and very probably unlawfully) coerced by the police, who had a carefully constructed agenda to force a confession in order to support their already-formulated belief that Knox was involved in the murder at some level. As you and the court point out, it's very difficult to explain the absence of even a written record of Knox's multi-hour interrogation that night, unless one concludes that the interrogation largely consisted of content that the police actively did not want to have recorded for posterity.

And when you add in the mendacious and deliberately-orchestrated actions of Mignini in eliciting the "spontaneous declaration", and the consistent lies and misdirections of the police and Mignini when under scrutiny about what happened that night, you get a pretty toxic cesspit of police and prosecutor misconduct. Let's just hope they get their proper comeuppance (which would hopefully also act as a deterrent to others in the future), and that lessons are learned and implemented.

The judge in this case cannot make a ruling to that effect as it was not pleaded.

What was pleaded was that Amanda committed calunnia against the police when she accused them of brutality. She was found "not guilty" of this charge alone.

 

[LondonJohn]

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to remove previously moderated content and response to same

When the ECHR rules (as it will) that Knox's rights to a fair trial and other human rights were seriously breached in the matter of the criminal slander conviction, the ECHR will order Italy to apply the proper remedy. And the proper remedy will be to exclude all evidence gathered in an improper manner which breached Knox's rights. And that in practice means that all of Knox's interrogation of the 5th/6th November will be inadmissible. And in turn, that means that Italy will have two options:

1) Annul Knox's criminal slander conviction, and consider retrying her without the evidence from the 5th/6th Nov interrogation (which is logically absurd, so in effect this would result in a total acquittal for Knox);

2) Ignore the ECHR order to apply proper remedy, and risk being thrown out as a signatory to the Convention (which would have wider political and judicial ramifications for Italy).

I very strongly suggest that Italy will take option (1) - as indeed it should. And then the whole sorry saga will finally be over. The only questions then will be around a) what happens to those in law enforcement and the judiciary who were actively culpable for the wrongful actions, and b) whether changes will be put into effect to try to minimise the chances of this sort of thing happening again to anybody else.

 

[Vixen]

You have to wonder if there is any recourse for Amanda to bring charges against the Police involved.

Annella, in a criminal trial, if the prosecution convinces the court there is a case to answer, then being found "not guilty" after a full hearing does not give rise to a compensation claim.