Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Darth Rotor said:
Vixen:
A point on terms.
l'assoluzione
Closest English term: Absolution
Considering the meaning of both exoneration and absolution, it's a close enough idiomatic fit to the more literal translation (absolution) absent the religious connotations of absolution as a term/word.

When someone renders l'assoluzione into English as exoneration, given that it's a legal matter, it's a very good fit in terms of meaning.
Click to expand...


Very true. And I strongly suspect that formal legal translations would render the Italian "assoluzione" into English as "exoneration" rather than "absolution" - for the very reasons you suggest above.

Though it's also worth pointing out that, even if one removes dogmatic religious connotations from "absolution", the word still implies some sort of restitution/rehabilitation at a moral/spiritual level - which would be an even deeper level than that implied by "exoneration". So one ought to be left in little doubt that, at the very least, the word "exoneration" is an appropriate translation, and that Knox & Sollecito have zero lingering suspicion hanging over them in the eyes of the Italian judicial system in respect of the murder.
 
Numbers said:
At the risk of continuing to agree with Bill, although maybe I can disagree with him in part, for old times' sake:

That the Marasca CSC panel MR explicitly supported Knox's final conviction for calunnia against Lumumba is not an issue. What I believe is the issue is that it goes beyond reiterating the previous verdict to make a statement about the outcome of a potential revision trial and includes a false statement regarding the evidence. These statements on their face seem to be an attempt to influence the revision trial, which rightfully, according to Italian procedural law and the European Convention on Human Rights, must be allowed to form its judgment based on the evidence presented to it and independent of prejudicial directions from another court.
Click to expand...

Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship....
 
LondonJohn said:
I entirely agree (as I said before) that the Marasca report shows clear evidence of hostility towards the ECHR. I postulated that this is very probably due to basic reactionary attitudes: the Italian Supreme Court wants to think of itself as the ultimate arbiter of justice in all matters Italian (other than in wider constitutional affairs), and does not like the idea of a supra-national court effectively having the power to tell it off and make it remedy judgements.

But, as I also said, this absolutely can be looked at in isolation from the actual issue at stake. It is not correct to say that if an SC panel is hostile to the ECHR telling Italy it's wrong over a certain case, then necessarily that SC panel also believes that Italy made the correct decision over that case.

In any case, I want to reiterate three things: 1) my comment was only ever a speculative piece of interpretation, which a) was utterly tangential to the debate proper about this case (hence the parentheses) and b) was never intended to be the kicking-off point for an extended debate on the words within the parentheses (again, hence the parentheses); 2) I might very well be wrong in my speculative interpretation; and 3) in any case, I never implied in any way that the Marasca panel "wanted" Knox to be ultimately exonerated on the criminal slander issue - my speculation was based wholly on the observation that the Marasca panel is clear on the lack of evidence against Knox and Sollecito, yet this appears at odds with a significant strand of the judicial reasoning underpinning her criminal slander conviction: that Knox was telling the truth when she said she'd been in the cottage at the time of the murder.

*sigh* Can we put this to bed now? I'll say again: parenthetical comment.
Click to expand...

LJ, you are continuing to post as though my posts are an attack on your posts. What I mean to do in my posts, however, is to point out what I think the issue raised by the MR is - based on a literal reading of the Marasca CSC panel MR and not trying to infer underlying beliefs of the judges. So are posts are not directly contradictory, but we are emphasizing different aspects.

I would not spend too much time speculating about the beliefs of the Italian judges. I think that Italian verdicts may reflect political compromises within the judiciary, such as, for instance, the reluctance of the judges to hold the police or prosecutors responsible for violations of Italian criminal or procedural laws, even at the cost of continuing violations of defendants' rights.
 
Numbers said:
LJ, you are continuing to post as though my posts are an attack on your posts. What I mean to do in my posts, however, is to point out what I think the issue raised by the MR is - based on a literal reading of the Marasca CSC panel MR and not trying to infer underlying beliefs of the judges. So are posts are not directly contradictory, but we are emphasizing different aspects.

I would not spend too much time speculating about the beliefs of the Italian judges. I think that Italian verdicts may reflect political compromises within the judiciary, such as, for instance, the reluctance of the judges to hold the police or prosecutors responsible for violations of Italian criminal or procedural laws, even at the cost of continuing violations of defendants' rights.
Click to expand...


No no, I don't see them as an attack on my posts. All I mean to say is that - as you explicitly say above - it's a waste of time (and totally irrelevant) to speculate about intent and beliefs and so on. So, having been guilty of making the first parenthetical aside about this subject, I've merely been trying to dampen down any extended diversion into this whole area. One could speculate in several different directions, and until the cows come home, but it wouldn't be anything more than a meaningless exercise in speculative psychology.

I think we all agree that the only things that matter are the actual words of the various judicial panels, and the meanings and implications of those words. And I totally agree that the words in the Marasca report indicate a certain hostility and resistance to the idea of the ECHR making binding judgements on this case (with, as you say, a prejudicial untruth thrown in for good measure). I still think the words of the Marasca report which deal with the murder charges stand somewhat in opposition to the judicial reasoning behind the criminal slander conviction, specifically in respect of Knox's presence (or otherwise) at the cottage at the time of the murder. But, at the end of the day, all that really counts is that Marasca annulled the murder-related convictions of Knox and Sollecito and threw the whole case out for good, as well as reversing the aggravating element to Knox's criminal slander conviction - and that's all the Marasca court was ever empowered to do anyhow. And that the grounds for Marasca to reach its verdicts were correct, safe and just. The rest is just window-dressing. :)
 
Wilson85 said:
You should read Amandas tapped phone calls (amandaknoxcase.com/statements-phone-taps-prison-intercepts/)

Very interesting: the conversation in the afternoon of the 5th of November (hours before the interrogation) with Dolly - they talk about suspects:
Dolly: So they don’t have any suspect?

Amanda: Well, yes, they have, but they don’t tell me…

Dolly: But it wouldn’t be the guy you were afraid of, would it?

Amanda: Ehm… the guy that…the only guy I know who is certainly a suspect is one I only met once because… ehm…I decided never to talk to him again because he took me to his home in the middle of the night after telling me he would be taking me to my place, that is to give me a lift home, instead he
didn’t take me home and did so only after about one and a half hour later, after arguing with him, telling him I wanted to go home, “Take me home!”, and he: “Alright”. I didn’t like that and told him so. He was a guy who met up with Meredith and her friends often, when they went out, so he is a suspect, I know. I mean: they don’t tell me who is suspected…​

Amanda is talking about Shaky (Hicham Khiri), a black man. Do you have any explanation why she 'fingers Patrik to cover up for Rudy' hours later without any suggestion of the police and although the only suspect she guesses is Shaky?


A 'friendly atmosphere'? Read what Amanda says about the 3rd and 4th Nov police interrogations in tapped phone calls. Keep in mind that these interrogations were before Raff dropped her alibi.

Tapped phone call with Annie Fuller on 5. Nov 18:20 (talking about Nov 4th):
Amanda: Yes, in fact my battery got flat and in any case I spent the whole day at the Police Station.

Annie: Good heavens! How did they treat you?

Amanda: It’s a little frustrating because… that is, they are very stressed and become more impatient with me and then… yesterday it’s been very difficult because when I went to the Police Station they questioned me and when I tried to reply they were telling me: “Are you’re lying? Are you sure you’re not lying? Because if you’re lying you are getting yourself in big trouble”, and I: “I’m not lying, I’m trying to help you”, you know? ​

Tapped phone call with Doroty on 5. Nov 19:00:
Doroty: You seem much better than yesterday.

Amanda: I am much better than yesterday, yesterday I was going crazy and even though I’m not in perfect form, today I function better, because since tis happened (- - -) they bombarded my mind and today I was able to not think about it, which is very positive​


And last but not least, the thing that she had insider knowledge (rape). Read the tapped conversation with Dolly in the afternoon of 5th Nov:
Dolly: Has she been raped?

Amanda: Well, that was the point: They asked me about her sexual life because it seems as if she had sex with someone but they don’t know if it was consensual or if it was a rape situation. They asked me questions about her sexual life, such as: was she having sex with someone… whom she had just met?, if she was doing some things during sex, so I don’t even know what the hell this guy did to her but it seems strange.

...

Amanda: … they only ask me questions, but from the questions they ask me I am in a position to understand who the suspect is, because they go: “ Do you know anyone tall who comes to your house?” And I: “Ok, great, then it has something to do with a tall person”; “Tell me something of Meredith’s sexual life”, and I: “Oh, great, she’s been raped.” Eh, eh, eh!​

Amandas statement to police 6. Nov 1:45 AM:
I struggle to remember those moments, but Patrik had sex with Meredith, with whom he was infatuated, but I do not recall whether Meredith had been threatened beforehand.​
Click to expand...


Shaky is AFAIAA a North African (= Arabic) so not a Sub-Saharan African like Rudy or Patrick. There is more heterogenity in Africa than in Europe, so you can't just claim one black guy is interchangeable with another. Amanda and Raff were talking of their suspicions of Khiri in loud stage whispers, as though they were perfectly aware the Questura was likely bugged. They thought they could deflect police attention away from themselves.


Amanda being a racist was affronted that Shaky spelt out to her he already had a girlfriend and the fact he offered to buy a creme bun (or whatever it was), on their way back when he gave her a lift on the back of his bike, was hardly his coming on to her, as she liked to later claim. Khiri was a good friend of Sophie's and both Sophie and Khiri were grilled incessantly by the police and wiretapped. So much for the Knox ridiculous claim in the Netflix film the police were only after 'the beautiful blonde American glrl' [as if Italy doesn't have far greater beauties themselves; for example, Sophia Loren, Claudia Cardinale, Gina Lollobrigidda, and er, um...ah.

Amanda resented Khiri because he was a friend by extension of Mez and the Brits.

Of course Amanda is going to have a different story according to who's listening, being a compulsive liar. In her email home to the world, when she was asked by police to keep matter confidential, she outrageously claimed the police asked her if Mez had 'anal sex', which is an obvious lie and an attempt to degrade Mez even in death. She does this again in court when she describes Mez' life blood as 'Ew', and claims she thought it was Mez' menstrual blood, when as we all now know it was Amanda who was the one who left Mez to clean up her mess after her.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
What's worse than a judge telling a lie?

Judge Nencini didn't lie in the strict sense of the word. Nencini just didn't care. He found the verdict and wrote the report that he believed the Supreme Court wanted.

He even managed to qualm the fears of one of the popular judges who said she was hearing different things publicly as opposed to what she was hearing in court. He blabbed about all this to the press, earning him a rare rebuke for talking about the case in detail just after the verdict.

Crini was even worse. Crini mailed in his prosecution of this. But between the two of them, they could not agree on what was what..... Nencini had to amend much of the stuff Crini brought to court - meaning that the defendants had no right to challenge those issues.....

Nencini expected to be praised by the Supreme Court - instead he was slapped down. Read the bit in the 2015 ISC motivations Report that criticizes him for simply returning a verdict he had thought was from an order of the 2013 ISC.
Click to expand...


'Twas e'er the way.

The good guys hate the bad guys, and the bad guys hate the good guys ~ Adam Ant
 
Vixen said:
Shaky is AFAIAA a North African (= Arabic) so not a Sub-Saharan African like Rudy or Patrick. There is more heterogenity in Africa than in Europe, so you can't just claim one black guy is interchangeable with another. Amanda and Raff were talking of their suspicions of Khiri in loud stage whispers, as though they were perfectly aware the Questura was likely bugged. They thought they could deflect police attention away from themselves.
Click to expand...
It seems your psychic powers are very good!


Vixen said:
Amanda being a racist was affronted that Shaky spelt out to her he already had a girlfriend and the fact he offered to buy a creme bun (or whatever it was), on their way back when he gave her a lift on the back of his bike, was hardly his coming on to her, as she liked to later claim. Khiri was a good friend of Sophie's and both Sophie and Khiri were grilled incessantly by the police and wiretapped. So much for the Knox ridiculous claim in the Netflix film the police were only after 'the beautiful blonde American glrl' [as if Italy doesn't have far greater beauties themselves; for example, Sophia Loren, Claudia Cardinale, Gina Lollobrigidda, and er, um...ah.

Amanda resented Khiri because he was a friend by extension of Mez and the Brits.
Click to expand...
Once again, you you please refrain from iing the familiar term for the victim of this crime. It is completely rude.

Vixen said:
Of course Amanda is going to have a different story according to who's listening, being a compulsive liar. In her email home to the world, when she was asked by police to keep matter confidential, she outrageously claimed the police asked her if Mez had 'anal sex', which is an obvious lie and an attempt to degrade Mez even in death. She does this again in court when she describes Mez' life blood as 'Ew', and claims she thought it was Mez' menstrual blood, when as we all now know it was Amanda who was the one who left Mez to clean up her mess after her.
Click to expand...

"When we all know"? Again, please stop using the familiar term.

It is obvious you are obsessed with one of the actors in this horrible drama. All this happened more than 9 years ago......
 
Vixen said:
Shaky is AFAIAA a North African (= Arabic) so not a Sub-Saharan African like Rudy or Patrick. There is more heterogenity in Africa than in Europe, so you can't just claim one black guy is interchangeable with another. Amanda and Raff were talking of their suspicions of Khiri in loud stage whispers, as though they were perfectly aware the Questura was likely bugged. They thought they could deflect police attention away from themselves.


Amanda being a racist was affronted that Shaky spelt out to her he already had a girlfriend and the fact he offered to buy a creme bun (or whatever it was), on their way back when he gave her a lift on the back of his bike, was hardly his coming on to her, as she liked to later claim. Khiri was a good friend of Sophie's and both Sophie and Khiri were grilled incessantly by the police and wiretapped. So much for the Knox ridiculous claim in the Netflix film the police were only after 'the beautiful blonde American glrl' [as if Italy doesn't have far greater beauties themselves; for example, Sophia Loren, Claudia Cardinale, Gina Lollobrigidda, and er, um...ah.

Amanda resented Khiri because he was a friend by extension of Mez and the Brits.

Of course Amanda is going to have a different story according to who's listening, being a compulsive liar. In her email home to the world, when she was asked by police to keep matter confidential, she outrageously claimed the police asked her if Mez had 'anal sex', which is an obvious lie and an attempt to degrade Mez even in death. She does this again in court when she describes Mez' life blood as 'Ew', and claims she thought it was Mez' menstrual blood, when as we all now know it was Amanda who was the one who left Mez to clean up her mess after her.
Click to expand...


The amount of vicious, entirely unsupported invective presented as fact in this post is simply breathtaking. Disgusting.
 
Bill Williams said:
It seems your psychic powers are very good!



Once again, you you please refrain from iing the familiar term for the victim of this crime. It is completely rude.



"When we all know"? Again, please stop using the familiar term.

It is obvious you are obsessed with one of the actors in this horrible drama. All this happened more than 9 years ago......
Click to expand...

It's been Anti-Bullying Week this week, which seems to have passed you by.
 
Vixen said:
Bully!
Click to expand...

I am sorry that you regard this request that way. I'm entitled to a point of view on this, that a complete stranger adopting a familiar term for the victim of crime - and a horrible crime at that - while heaping abuse on to exonerated people is fairly weird and disturbing.

Your mileage obviously varies. But you are not entitled to control the way people regard the use of such familiar terms.
 
Bill Williams said:
I am sorry that you regard this request that way. I'm entitled to a point of view on this, that a complete stranger adopting a familiar term for the victim of crime - and a horrible crime at that - while heaping abuse on to exonerated people is fairly weird and disturbing.

Your mileage obviously varies. But you are not entitled to control the way people regard the use of such familiar terms.
Click to expand...


Unless you are a mod, it is not your place to dictate to others.
 
Rduy Case Review

So Rudy's appeal to Florence has been accepted and he gets a hearing 20 December 2016. That will make Raff sweat and Amanda tremble. They fear Rudy, although, given how innocent they proclaim themselves, one wonders what they are so anxious and worried about.


http://www.ansa.it/english/news/gen...iew_9386ac48-7d46-4e1b-bf05-bb87fdc9a142.html


It will mean Marasca coming under the spotlight for sure.
 
Vixen said:
So Rudy's appeal to Florence has been accepted and he gets a hearing 20 December 2016. That will make Raff sweat and Amanda tremble. They fear Rudy, although, given how innocent they proclaim themselves, one wonders what they are so anxious and worried about.


http://www.ansa.it/english/news/gen...iew_9386ac48-7d46-4e1b-bf05-bb87fdc9a142.html


It will mean Marasca coming under the spotlight for sure.
Click to expand...

For me the only thing the two exonerated need worry about is if the Italian judiciary finds a way to descend into the kind of madness Nencini represented.
 
Vixen said:
Shaky is AFAIAA a North African (= Arabic) so not a Sub-Saharan African like Rudy or Patrick. There is more heterogenity in Africa than in Europe, so you can't just claim one black guy is interchangeable with another. Amanda and Raff were talking of their suspicions of Khiri in loud stage whispers, as though they were perfectly aware the Questura was likely bugged. They thought they could deflect police attention away from themselves.


Amanda being a racist was affronted that Shaky spelt out to her he already had a girlfriend and the fact he offered to buy a creme bun (or whatever it was), on their way back when he gave her a lift on the back of his bike, was hardly his coming on to her, as she liked to later claim. Khiri was a good friend of Sophie's and both Sophie and Khiri were grilled incessantly by the police and wiretapped. So much for the Knox ridiculous claim in the Netflix film the police were only after 'the beautiful blonde American glrl' [as if Italy doesn't have far greater beauties themselves; for example, Sophia Loren, Claudia Cardinale, Gina Lollobrigidda, and er, um...ah.

Amanda resented Khiri because he was a friend by extension of Mez and the Brits.

Of course Amanda is going to have a different story according to who's listening, being a compulsive liar. In her email home to the world, when she was asked by police to keep matter confidential, she outrageously claimed the police asked her if Mez had 'anal sex', which is an obvious lie and an attempt to degrade Mez even in death. She does this again in court when she describes Mez' life blood as 'Ew', and claims she thought it was Mez' menstrual blood, when as we all now know it was Amanda who was the one who left Mez to clean up her mess after her.
Click to expand...

Vixen accuses Amanda of being racist whilst also accusing Amanda of helping Guede a black man to rape and murder a white woman. Vixen does not seem to recognise this contradiction. Amanda was the victim of a disgusting lie when she was told she had HIV when she did not and it is Amanda who gets called a compulsive liar.
 
Vixen said:
So Rudy's appeal to Florence has been accepted and he gets a hearing 20 December 2016. That will make Raff sweat and Amanda tremble. They fear Rudy, although, given how innocent they proclaim themselves, one wonders what they are so anxious and worried about.


http://www.ansa.it/english/news/gen...iew_9386ac48-7d46-4e1b-bf05-bb87fdc9a142.html


It will mean Marasca coming under the spotlight for sure.
Click to expand...


No. His appeal has not been accepted. It's been admitted for review and consultation too decide if it will be accepted.

Rather extraordinary (to say the least) to see that Guede apparently has a "press officer". Strange things are going on here........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom