Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

[LondonJohn]

Bloody Italians!

Why can't they be more like...er...

.... the Council of Europe, which the Italian State voted to join and to abide by its rules?

Or are you now claiming that the Italian State didn't really intend to remain a member of the Council of Europe, and that it was dragged there against its will? Another conspiracy theory beckoning, perhaps.....?

 

[LondonJohn]

It is a mannerism I picked up from Grinder.

Any objections?

Well, none really. But you wouldn't write "36,1 seconds" just because you'd seen it written as "36,1s" in an Italian publication, would you? And the use of the commas might look a little misleading to some, I suppose. Other than that......

 

[Vixen]

Until you can provide citations for these assertions you should stop making them.

The last time you provided a cite, it actually disproved what you were claiming, then you said no one listened to the author you yourself provided us with! Hoots!

ETA - there was no intrigue in Hellmann's appointment by the president of the appeals court of Perugia. We've been over this with Machiavelli. He stopped claiming this when we found a link to the first judge approached who had declined because he was transferring to juvenile court.

Your conspiratorializing goes nowhere. But you sure are persistent!

Even the Seattle Intelligencer Knox Fanzine remarked on this:

Meanwhile, in Umbria, the last-minute shuffling of magistrates in one of Italy's most high-profile international cases has some wondering what kind of behind-the-scenes maneuvering might be happening on the eve of Knox's Nov. 24 appeal.

Legal observers in Perugia, however, maintain the change of magistrates from Sergio Matteini Chiari to Claudio Pratillo Hellmann was simply an "internal administrative issue."
Matteini Chiari, a judge who prosecuted the controversial Andreotti appeals trial over the mafia murder of an Italian journalist, is apparently in line to head the juvenile court. Knox's attorney Luciano Ghirga referred to both judges as "respected and experienced."

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Change-of-judge-adds-questions-to-Knox-s-appeal-777351.php

For a glimpse behind the scenes as to what this really was about:

Only one month ago Umbria’s top criminal judge Sergio Matteini Chiari was to preside.

Now a very angry Judge Chiari has been forced aside with no public explanation from Chief Judge De Nunzio [image below] as to why.

A wildly wrongly qualified judge, Hellmann, a business judge with just two criminal trials in his past, both fiascos, mysteriously takes his place.

Rumors of foul play are appearing in the Italian media. Has Chief Judge De Nunzio been leaned upon politically? Do big bucks or rogue masons have any role in this?

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...ry_top_criminal_judge_chiari_is_mysteriously/

and it quotes respected journalist, Andrea Vogt as follows:

The new judge [Hellmann] assigned to Knox’s case is no stranger to allegations of judicial error. In fact, he was one of three judges who, in 2000, overturned a controversial conviction in the stabbing murder of Cinzia Bruno, setting free a man who had been jailed for more than seven years.

Bruno’s husband, Massimo Pisano, was convicted along with his lover in the stabbing death of Bruno, who was found in 1993 on the banks of the Tiber River, near Rome. He was sentenced to life in prison, a ruling upheld in all three phases of Italian court process, including the Supreme Court.

Then, a “revision” of the case by a three-man court of appeals panel, including Pratillo Hellman, freed Pisano after he had already served seven years, six months and 12 days behind bars.

The Bruno case is, of course, no indicator of how Pratillo Hellman might approach Knox’s case. However, it shows a willingness to go against the judicial grain that is likely to please hopeful Knox supporters.

Pete Quennell looks into his crystal ball and pithily comments on the 'disastrous new judge':

Prepare for a “messy” appeal at best?

 

[LondonJohn]

roflmaolol bloody bastards!

Well yes. If Italian criminal courts are acting in violation of the Italian Constitution, then they ARE "bloody bastards" fundamentally failing in their duty and acting wholly unjustly.

Or do you think it's fine and dandy that courts can act as they like, regardless of whether that's in line with their country's own constitution? I'd be really interested to hear your opinion on that.

 

[LondonJohn]

"Respected journalist Andrea Vogt"

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! *breathes* "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

 

[LondonJohn]

(Was that the same "respected journalist" who recently made all sorts of incorrect "inside" claims about the likely outcome of Guede's appeal for a revision trial, and all sorts of incorrect claims about what any such revision trial might achieve? And the same "respected journalist" whose "impartial" reporting on the Knox/Sollecito trial primarily consisted of phoning or calling on Mignini to see what he could tell her, then printing that? THAT "respected journalist"?)

 

[Vixen]

Well, none really. But you wouldn't write "36,1 seconds" just because you'd seen it written as "36,1s" in an Italian publication, would you? And the use of the commas might look a little misleading to some, I suppose. Other than that......

I would write a statute paragraph: Art. 530 Para.II.

This makes it clear it is NOT referring to 530.1 (2), as you attempted to claim.

Thank you for your lesson, but I think I am rather more erudite than you.

 

[LondonJohn]

And by the way and in passing, Matteini Chiari was not "forced out" of the Knox/Sollecito appeal trial, nor was he "very angry". The true reasons behind the change of judge are entirely anodyne and have been explained many times before. Do stop drinking the Quennell/Vogt KoolAid.......

 

[LondonJohn]

I would write a statute paragraph: Art. 530 Para.II.

This makes it clear it is NOT referring to 530.1 (2), as you attempted to claim.

Thank you for your lesson, but I think I am rather more erudite than you.

Ermmmm WHAT?

I'm talking about writing (e.g.) "530.1" rather than "530,1". Nothing whatsoever to do with subsections of paragraphs.

And, ummmm, no. You categorically are not. At least I'm 99,9% confident you're not........

 

[Vixen]

Well yes. If Italian criminal courts are acting in violation of the Italian Constitution, then they ARE "bloody bastards" fundamentally failing in their duty and acting wholly unjustly.

Or do you think it's fine and dandy that courts can act as they like, regardless of whether that's in line with their country's own constitution? I'd be really interested to hear your opinion on that.

Please keep at the forefront of your mind that if convicted in the USA the kids would now be serving life without parole or waiting on death row. In England, they would have got life.

Italy has a serious problem with organised crime, and we see it here, in this case. However, ultimately, Italy is a most decent civilised country.

 

[Numbers]

Definitions in dictionaries are often given in an order corresponding to the frequency that they are used. I believe 1a and 1b are far more commonly used and the highlighted part above is incorrect in my opinion. Perhaps more importantly, it was clear from context the sense in which both Grinder and I used "innocent". Your insistence that we are confused because we're not using your definition is not exactly sporting and I've given you multiple citations supporting my usage. Have you looked at them? Here's one that specifically mentions OJ.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/acquittal

whoanellie, thanks for your patience in this discussion. I apologize if my responses sometime seem impolite. I should like to indicate that the confusion is in the use of the word "innocent" with differing meanings by many of us, without being clear which meaning is meant in a particular situation.

Here is the definition you cite:

Acquittal
Definition

At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent. Thus, a person may be acquitted of a crime but found civilly liable in a civil case regarding that same crime, e.g. O.J. Simpson, because civil cases have a lower burden of proof than criminal cases.

Here are my comments:

1. The definition is primarily of "acquittal" which is a synonym for "judgment of not guilty" in the US and in Italy.

2. While I do not mean to be unnecessarily argumentative, the word "innocent" is NOT defined in this paragraph; it is used in one of its meanings, which may be rendered as: "did not commit the criminal act". This use of innocent may sometimes be used with a qualifier for clarity, such as "actually innocent" or "factually innocent", for example, in the context of convicted persons who claim to be innocent and seek to be exonerated.

3. The paragraph only applies to US law with respect to the mention of civil cases. As I have posted previously, in Italy, civil cases which run concurrently with criminal proceedings have essentially the same burden of proof, CPP Article 654. That is, the "binding effect" provision means that if there is a final acquittal or a final conviction in the criminal case, that is also the effect on the civil case: acquittal means the accused is not liable, while conviction means the accused is liable.

Italian law (CPP Article 652) also provides that a final criminal judgment of acquittal has binding effect releasing the accused from paying damages, as long as the specification of the acquittal is: the criminal act did not occur, the accused did not commit the criminal act, or the accused carried out the act to perform a duty or the exercise a legal right (for example, self-defense).

So I think that your citation, although an excellent one in relation to US law, actually does not define "innocent" or "innocence" and it certainly does not explain Italian law, which is different from US law in important ways.

 

[LondonJohn]

Please keep at the forefront of your mind that if convicted in the USA the kids would now be serving life without parole or waiting on death row. In England, they would have got life.

Italy has a serious problem with organised crime, and we see it here, in this case. However, ultimately, Italy is a most decent civilised country.

Setting aside the hilarious shifting of goalposts from you in this "response"......

You're totally overlooking the rather fundamental point that any competent court in the UK or USA would have overwhelmingly acquitted Knox and Sollecito* (and the judge would almost certainly have had very very harsh words to say about the prosecution and police investigation). Other than that, you're absolutely spot on as usual!

And organised crime has precisely nothing to do with this case. Unless you have actual, reliable evidence to indicate otherwise. Oh and it really shouldn't need to be said (but I have a sad feeling that it does need to be said in this instance) that "reliable sources tell me that...." or "I read somewhere that...." or "well-informed people in Italy know very well that...." or "I read it on the back of a match box left in a pub toilet that...." do not count as actual, reliable evidence.

Away you go! Put up or shut up on the "organised crime corrupted this trial" accusation.


* There was never one single credible, reliable piece of evidence presented to the court which pointed to guilt (all the prosecution evidence was either fundamentally grossly unreliable, and/or it was capable of an alternative interpretation that was wholly compatible with innocence), and all the credible, reliable evidence presented to the court was entirely compatible with a different assailant acting alone.

 

[Numbers]

(By the way, for Vixen's benefit, most countries in mainland Europe write commas for decimal points. Therefore an Italian would, for example, write 43,1 secondi where US and UK systems would write 43.1 seconds. And therefore where Italians write 531,1 and 530,2, we write 530.1 and 530.2. Just FYI.)

And interestingly (or not), the judges commonly write, for example:

dell'art. 530, comma 2, cod. proc. pen.

where comma (in Italian) = paragraph (in English)

 

[Bill Williams]

And by the way and in passing, Matteini Chiari was not "forced out" of the Knox/Sollecito appeal trial, nor was he "very angry". The true reasons behind the change of judge are entirely anodyne and have been explained many times before. Do stop drinking the Quennell/Vogt KoolAid.......

No less that Andrea Vogt herself conspiratorialized it this way in a Seattle PI piece on Oct 21, 2010. She openly wondered if there was some behind the scenes shenanigans, even though the only thing she had to report, really, was:

Legal observers in Perugia, however, maintain the change of magistrates from Sergio Matteini Chiari to Claudio Pratillo Hellmann was simply an "internal administrative issue."

Matteini Chiari, a judge who prosecuted the controversial Andreotti appeals trial over the mafia murder of an Italian journalist, is apparently in line to head the juvenile court. Knox's attorney Luciano Ghirga referred to both judges as "respected and experienced."

Family and supporters of Knox and Sollecito have been arguing that the pair'sc onvictions were the result of judicial error, and that the only true killer is Guede.​

This was during the time when Vogt was openly consorting with the prosecution, as per Francesco Maresca's recent memoirs where he said he played a role in making introductions of sympathetic reporters. She was often PMF's same-day source from the courtroom broadcasting how guilty the pair were, passing on anything the prosecution alleged.

If I can find it, I'll link to the Umbria News source which presented Chiari's move to the juvenile division as because of his own request.

The only people who believe that Hellmann's appointment to take the first 2nd grade trial was a conspiracy are nutters. Machiavelli called the president of the appeals division, Wladimir De Nunzio, a criminal for the appointment. I wonder if he ever made that allegation in a courtroom?

ETA - I see that Vixen beat me to it, and found the Seattle PI article before I did. I would respectfully ask Vixen to check with Ms. Vogt these days to see if she stands by that story!? Hoots!

 

[LondonJohn]

And interestingly (or not), the judges commonly write, for example:

dell'art. 530, comma 2, cod. proc. pen.

where comma (in Italian) = paragraph (in English)

Very true. Perhaps this was part of the confusion.

As a companion point to the use of commas for decimal points, the same mainland Europe countries which employ this system also employ full stops (US: periods) for the "thousands" break in large numbers.

Therefore, for example, the number "ten thousand seven hundred and twenty-three point eight" is written in the UK or US as:

10,723.8

But in countries such as Italy it is written as:

10.723,8

(For accountants or management accountants with international aspirations, this can be very useful information to know.....)

 

[Vixen]

Very true. Perhaps this was part of the confusion.

As a companion point to the use of commas for decimal points, the same mainland Europe countries which employ this system also employ full stops (US: periods) for the "thousands" break in large numbers.

Therefore, for example, the number "ten thousand seven hundred and twenty-three point eight" is written in the UK or US as:

10,723.8

But in countries such as Italy it is written as:

10.723,8

(For accountants or management accountants with international aspirations, this can be very useful information to know.....)

Is this all new to you, then? Clearly you haven't been to Europe much. An accountant would write: 10,723.80, just so you know.

 

[LondonJohn]

Is this all new to you, then? Clearly you haven't been to Europe much. An accountant would write: 10,723.80, just so you know.

Well it seemed new to you, which is why I was pointing it out. If it was new to me, I would be the recipient of the information rather than its disseminator........

(ETA if it were, for example, an interest rate, then by no means would a UK/US accountant necessarily write "10,723.80" rather than "10,723.8" (and nor would an Italian one write "10.723,80" rather than "10.723,8"). Or do you think that all numbers that (management) accountants deal with are necessarily currency amounts with 100 sub-units?)

 

[Vixen]

Um. Not in Italy they wouldn't. That's kind of..... the point here.

Blimey. Englishman goes abroad and - crumbs! - the critters do funny things with their decimal points and full stops.

 

[Vixen]

Well it seemed new to you, which is why I was pointing it out. If it was new to me, I would be the recipient of the information rather than its disseminator........

It's hardly new to me. I will retain my EU passport when Theresa May takes yours away.

 

[LondonJohn]

It's hardly new to me. I will retain my EU passport when Theresa May takes yours away.

Then why were you writing "530,1"?


(And you can presume to know nothing about me, by the way. Not to mention the needless deterioration into personalisation. Please refrain.)