Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Kauffer]

As we have discussed, a common word can have a different, more precise legal definition than the common or garden meaning.

Thus, 'interrogation' in the legal meaning of Italy's police code means the interview of a 'formal suspect'.

Amanda was not a suspect as of the time she blurted out her accusation and confession of being at the murder scene and rape. The interview was immediately terminated.

Clear now?

I see, so then Knox was not actually presented with a document to sign after this 'confession', which made her a suspect? So, you see, there's your problem.

If the 'interview' had indeed been terminated, as you suggest, we might be having a different conversation about it, because necessarily, events both before and after, would have been very different in character. She would immediately have been given a lawyer, her right to silence respected and the 'conversation' with Mignini and further signed document at 5:45 would never have happened.

Your further problem is that nothing anybody says without benefit of counsel can be used against them, in any way.

But Knox had no lawyer, either at the beginning of the 'interview', at 1:45, between 1:45 and 5:45, at 5:45 or anytime afterwards that day. She didn't get a lawyer until she walked in front of the judge.

Yet the ECHR requires the provision of a lawyer at the earliest possible opportunity.

Pray tell me, when was the earliest possible opportunity?

Clear yet?

 

[Desert Fox]

The US Police try to avoid the word "Interrogation" as well and prefer the word "Interview" but anybody with four brain cells realizes that they are interrogation. I don't see why Italy is magically different.

 

[Diocletus]

No. Mignini was not there. You re-invent even the Griffin interview. Mignini never says he was there! This is what you always do Bill! You re-invent the words of others.
Mignini makes it very clear actually in numerous occasions that he was not present at the interogation, never interrupted an interrogation (they - they police - reportedly interrupted it, not him), this is what is said even in all court testimonies. You can't be so dishonest and dull.

Yeah. Mignini was in the control room listening to Knox's screams until he entered and took her statement, later in true liar fashion mischaracterizing himself as a mere notary. What a POS.

The courts have already decided that she should have had a lawyer, and its obvious that this lawyer should have been provided before she was asked to sign any statement that the police typed up for her, so I'm not sure what the argument is here.

 

[Diocletus]

I just note that there are several legal idiocies in the above paragraph.
1) the police cannot declare someone a formal suspect; they can stop interrogation if they think there could be a legal instance, but they have to wait for a magistrate, because they don't have a power to declare someone a suspect; they cannot decide themselves, they cannot inform suspects of their rights.
2) the interrogation did stop at 01.45, where she is reported saying "I confusely remember Lumumba killed her". The interrogation does stop at that point, when she places evidence of herself at the scene of murder. At that point there was no interrogation, and she was given a chamonille tee.
3) the Italian Procedure Code though allows to collect statements also from suspects without a lawyer, in condition of diminshed right of defence, if it's deemed useful for the immediacy of investigation;
4) there is no law prohibiting a PM to see a potential suspect before he/she sees a lawyer; not only, the legal provisions are quite the opposite; the Code stays that the police shall place the person of itnerest at disposition of the magistrate "without waiting", the sooner the better. No one-day-waiting at all! That is just one of your gracious inventions. The PM shall see the person immediately if possible. Only then, the PM can decide whether he/she is a suspect and then tell the suspect about his/her rights. Not before.
5) the PM cannot ask a person "to confirm what he/she told to the police"; the PM does not interrogate the person; it's the ivestigation judge the first person that interrogates the suspects.

Do you see how ignorant you are?
It's unbelievable.
After all thse years, your grasp of the law is so miserable... I'm speechless

Btw Amanda Knox also wrote multiple pieces of paper herself, she did so "voluntarily" and gave them "voluntarily" without being requested byt anyone. Those writings further place false evidence against Lumumba.
Amanda Knox then refused to respond when it was the turn of the prelimiary judge, the one who could have actualy interrogate her.

None of this matters because the courts have already established that the interrogators at a minimum put her in a position of grave psychological pressure, and that she should have had a lawyer but did not.

 

[Diocletus]

ECHR case law, for your information requires the provision of counsel at the earliest possible opportunity. When, according to you, was the earliest possible opportunity? When she is taken into the interrogation room? At 1:45? At 5:45? On the occasion of her arrest? In the prison to which she is taken? Or, actually, moments before she stood in front of a judge when there was no time or opportunity for a consultation?

In this regard, I find this interesting:

b) Was the applicant, as required by Article 6 § 3 a) of the Convention, informed promptly, in a language she could understand and in detail, of the nature and cause of the charges against her for false accusation?

This is focusing on the charges of "false accusation", which were not introduced into the case until much later (we need to nail down just when).

I find this interesting, because Machiavelli is always saying that she was required to file a complaint of mistreatment within some period (90 days?) after the mistreatment. But, at that point, it looks like she had not even been charged with callunnia, so she would have had no reason to do so. When the callunia charges were finally filed, Knox took the only course of action available to her: she raised the mistreatment in defense of the claims. Of course, by this time, nobody within the prosecution was going to investigate the circumstances of the interrogation because that could be disruptive to the defense, so the police were able contested only by Knox to offer whatever BS they wanted (probably a violation of equality of arms).

Given what I think is the lateness of the callunnia charges, Knox took every action available to her--raising the defense of mistreatment, filing appeals, and BTW, ultimately prevailing on her argument that prosecution conduct placed her in a position of great psychological pressure, and prevailing (apparently on grounds of truth) on the claim of slander that the prosecution later tried to raise against her for alleging mistreatment.

The ECtHR seems well-aware of all of this.

 

[Bill Williams]

The US Police try to avoid the word "Interrogation" as well and prefer the word "Interview" but anybody with four brain cells realizes that they are interrogation. I don't see why Italy is magically different.

It's the very reason Machiavelli will not budge that the interrogation was over before Mignini arrived. Mignini admits to talking directly with Knox, as if only a notary. But heck, it was only a polite conversation, where Mignini somehow intuited that she needed to continue making spontaneous statements. Yah, sure.

For some technical reason us up in the cheap seats cannot figure out, that then makes what Knox experienced past 2 am "not an interrogation", therefore she did not have rights to council or independent translation. ("Independent" in the sense that there was someone not trying to be a mediator between her and police.... Machiavelli seems to think it was all right for Anna Donnino to act that way - even calling her as functioning like a diplomat or other such nonsense.)

Does anyone need to hear any more than this, to appreciate why ECHR now has this calunnia conviction on their agenda?

 

[acbytesla]

ECHR was using Amanda's own self-serving words. ECHR have only one side of the story. From a known serial liar, as upheld by the Supreme Court, whose conduct remains 'strongly suspicious'.

And a swing and a miss. Steeeerrriike One!

 

[Vixen]

Yeah. Mignini was in the control room listening to Knox's screams until he entered and took her statement, later in true liar fashion mischaracterizing himself as a mere notary. What a POS.

The courts have already decided that she should have had a lawyer, and its obvious that this lawyer should have been provided before she was asked to sign any statement that the police typed up for her, so I'm not sure what the argument is here.

...based on Amanda's own false claims in the ECHR application.

 

[Vixen]

I see, so then Knox was not actually presented with a document to sign after this 'confession', which made her a suspect? So, you see, there's your problem.

If the 'interview' had indeed been terminated, as you suggest, we might be having a different conversation about it, because necessarily, events both before and after, would have been very different in character. She would immediately have been given a lawyer, her right to silence respected and the 'conversation' with Mignini and further signed document at 5:45 would never have happened.

Your further problem is that nothing anybody says without benefit of counsel can be used against them, in any way.

But Knox had no lawyer, either at the beginning of the 'interview', at 1:45, between 1:45 and 5:45, at 5:45 or anytime afterwards that day. She didn't get a lawyer until she walked in front of the judge.

Yet the ECHR requires the provision of a lawyer at the earliest possible opportunity.

Pray tell me, when was the earliest possible opportunity?

Clear yet?

When she was formally arrested.

Both Amanda and Raff declined legal advice, when ALL of the other housemates went to their lawyers as a first stop.

Silenzi's parents drove him straight to a lawyers office as soon as he stepped off the train back to Perugia. What stopped Raff's parents?

 

[Bill Williams]

Yeah. Mignini was in the control room listening to Knox's screams until he entered and took her statement, later in true liar fashion mischaracterizing himself as a mere notary. What a POS.

The courts have already decided that she should have had a lawyer, and its obvious that this lawyer should have been provided before she was asked to sign any statement that the police typed up for her, so I'm not sure what the argument is here.

...based on Amanda's own false claims in the ECHR application.

This is great news, Vixen. Thanks for exposing the false claims.... ah, er, but you have not listed them.

Is it the lack of lawyer thing? Is that a false-claim by Knox? That's great news, you've just busted this case wide open!!! Knox had a lawyer.... she must have had one, you say that her application saying she didn't is false.

What was the name of the lawyer she had at interrogation?

 

[Vixen]

None of this matters because the courts have already established that the interrogators at a minimum put her in a position of grave psychological pressure, and that she should have had a lawyer but did not.

When the ECHR discover Amanda stepped into the police station of her own insistence and refused to go home when asked to by the police, they will realise that far from being coerced into naming Patrick, she was chomping at the bit to do so, as soon she heard Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her.

It was cold-blooded and calculated, to the extent she went away to a quiet private place to spell it out in a privately written memo by her own hand and PRESSED it onto the police.

It would have been remiss of the police to ignore a complaint filed.

 

[Kauffer]

When she was formally arrested.

Both Amanda and Raff declined legal advice, when ALL of the other housemates went to their lawyers as a first stop.

Silenzi's parents drove him straight to a lawyers office as soon as he stepped off the train back to Perugia. What stopped Raff's parents?

She didn't get a lawyer when she was 'formally' arrested! Caso chiuso huh?

You're whole argument collapses.

I've already explained to you that there was no valid waiver of her right to counsel.

 

[Vixen]

It's the very reason Machiavelli will not budge that the interrogation was over before Mignini arrived. Mignini admits to talking directly with Knox, as if only a notary. But heck, it was only a polite conversation, where Mignini somehow intuited that she needed to continue making spontaneous statements. Yah, sure.

For some technical reason us up in the cheap seats cannot figure out, that then makes what Knox experienced past 2 am "not an interrogation", therefore she did not have rights to council or independent translation. ("Independent" in the sense that there was someone not trying to be a mediator between her and police.... Machiavelli seems to think it was all right for Anna Donnino to act that way - even calling her as functioning like a diplomat or other such nonsense.)

Does anyone need to hear any more than this, to appreciate why ECHR now has this calunnia conviction on their agenda?

To those of you in the stalls, try to imagine what would happen if you walked into your local police station to complain you saw a Cabriolet drive crash into an Audi a few days ago.

Will they patiently listen as you spell out your claims, AND GIVE YOU A STATEMENT TO SIGN (ETA) or are they supposed to ignore you and offer you tea and biscuits and a lawyer paid for by taxpayers?

Thank you. Once you understand police obligations, you may move up to the balcony.

 

[acbytesla]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH This reads like a spider on LSD. All over the place. Massive holes. Crazy insane fragments with tenuous links.

All that's lacking is the manic laughter and mad English accent to go with it (cf: the baddies in Jungle Book).

Flailing away at a pitch in the dirt.

Steeerike Two!

 

[acbytesla]

...based on Amanda's own false claims in the ECHR application.

Couldn't hit water if she fell out of a boat.
Steesrike Three! You're Out!

 

[Kauffer]

When the ECHR discover Amanda stepped into the police station of her own insistence and refused to go home when asked to by the police, they will realise that far from being coerced into naming Patrick, she was chomping at the bit to do so, as soon she heard Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her.

It was cold-blooded and calculated, to the extent she went away to a quiet private place to spell it out in a privately written memo by her own hand and PRESSED it onto the police.

It would have been remiss of the police to ignore a complaint filed.

Interesting. So, how did she get from the waiting room of the questura into the interrogation room? She must have been in the interrogation room before she heard anything about Raffael's statement from the police. You do understand all this right? A spontaneous declaration -'chomping at the bit' as you put it, would have required her to finger Lumumba pretty immediately on her arrival at the questura. But it didn't happen like that. It was a police interview! You know right? Cops asking questions etc. We call it an interrogation. With Knox as the suspect. And you can't have one without a lawyer.

 

[Vixen]

This is great news, Vixen. Thanks for exposing the false claims.... ah, er, but you have not listed them.

Is it the lack of lawyer thing? Is that a false-claim by Knox? That's great news, you've just busted this case wide open!!! Knox had a lawyer.... she must have had one, you say that her application saying she didn't is false.

What was the name of the lawyer she had at interrogation?

She claims she was falsely told she had HIV. A lie. She claims she was slapped around the head, but then failed to report it to the police complaints procedures, her lawyers, the priest or even the US ambassador who regularly visited her.

She claims she was coerced into naming Patrick, when truth is, she named Patrick because she discovered Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her.

She horridly accuses Mez and her housemates of being druggies and Raff being a depressant who took acid and cocaine.

She disgracefully accuses medical professionals of medical misconduct and police of brutality, when SHE was the one who confessed to being at the scene and taking Patrick there.

She led the police a merry dance, pretending to suffer from Amnesia caused by smoking dope, and therefore, couldn't remember what she did on the murder night.

So, not the wilting violet she paints herself to the ECHR.

 

[Diocletus]

Interesting. So, how did she get from the waiting room of the questura into the interrogation room? She must have been in the interrogation room before she heard anything about Raffael's statement from the police. You do understand all this right? A spontaneous declaration -'chomping at the bit' as you put it, would have required her to finger Lumumba pretty immediately on her arrival at the questura. But it didn't happen like that. It was a police interview! You know right? Cops asking questions etc. We call it an interrogation. With Knox as the suspect. And you can't have one without a lawyer.

BTW, they weren't "spontaneous declarations", because if they were, then the Italian Supreme Court would have held 1:45 and 5:45 usable against Knox instead of inadmissible against her for purposes of proving the murder.

"Spontaneous declaration" is just Mignini propaganda, because if they aren't spontaneous, then they are the product of interrogation, and that means that Mignini broke the law.

 

[Diocletus]

A lie. She claims she was slapped around the head, but then failed to report it to the police complaints procedures, her lawyers, the priest or even the US ambassador who regularly visited her.

She wrote "you hit me" on a piece of paper the next morning and gave it to the police. Seems adequate to me.

 

[Vixen]

Interesting. So, how did she get from the waiting room of the questura into the interrogation room? She must have been in the interrogation room before she heard anything about Raffael's statement from the police. You do understand all this right? A spontaneous declaration -'chomping at the bit' as you put it, would have required her to finger Lumumba pretty immediately on her arrival at the questura. But it didn't happen like that. It was a police interview! You know right? Cops asking questions etc. We call it an interrogation. With Knox as the suspect. And you can't have one without a lawyer.

Your roommate has been murdered. Your boyfriend is asked to go to the questura and you tag along with him. You are told to go home. You say, no, I want to wait for boyffy.

Whilst waiting, you offer to help the police draw up a list of who frequented the house.

How does this call for the right to a lawyer.

Police are suspicious. They are paid to be suspicious. They are trained to be suspicious. You know they are suspicious.

What on earth would possess you to imagine you can make a confession and allegation and the police will not act?

The police immediately acted and terminated the conversation.

They are not obliged to tell you why.