• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 26

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stacyhs said:
The prosecution has a ready and willing PR company at their disposal that they don't even have to pay for: the media. The police/prosecutor/"sources close to the prosecution" give the media information that they want published. Naturally, only their side is given to the media. The public reads this and assumes it's all true and accurate without hearing any contradictory evidence. The defense is constantly trying to catch up with this tactic but the harm is already done. This is especially true in the early stages of an investigation. For example, the picture of the "bloody bathroom", the report of the running washing machine, Amanda's "lie" about the Harry Potter book, the "bloody footprints", Amanda smelling of sex, the bleach receipt, etc all swayed the public in the early stages of the investigation toward guilt. The defense is at an absolute disadvantage from day one and, even when the defendants hire someone to help them combat this prosecution advantage, they get attacked and accused of trying to manipulate and sway public opinion. But the police/prosecution are never seen as doing the exact same thing only they don't have to hire anyone and get it all for free.
Click to expand...

I agree the media provided very effective PR for the prosecution in several ways. The prosecution had friendly journalists such as John Follain. To the best of my knowledge the mainstream media never covered the massive level of corruption by the police/prosecution described in the links below.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contamination-labwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-perjury-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com...old-about-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
Besides the falsehoods fed to the media, the media told their own falsehoods as detailed in the links below
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda-knox-media-lies/

A lot of the media coverage towards Amanda was very hostile as detailed below

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/media.html

Despite the conduct of the media, TJMK complained the media was biased in Amanda’s favour. It shows how stupid and deluded PGP are.

If as Vixen constantly claims, there was a mountain of evidence and a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele, why did the prosecution had to resort to spreading false information to the media regarding bleach receipts, the washing machine running, the Harry Potter books and showering in a bloody bathroom. Why resort to numerous lies if the prosecution had so much evidence and a slam dunk case. There is a golden rule that the prosecution should never have to resort to lying if they have a slam dunk case.

The relationship between the media and the prosecution shows the industrial scale hypocrisy of the PGP. They complain about Amanda’s family using a PR firm but had no problem when the media provided effective PR for corrupt prosecutors. Vixen constantly bangs on about Amanda and Raffaele telling umpteen lies but PGP had no problem with the prosecutors leaking umpteen lies to the media and the media spreading lies about Amanda.
 
Numbers said:
The ECHR and its parent organization, the Council of Europe (CoE) recently began providing a summary of the "supervisory actions" of the Committee of Ministers (which "supervises the execution" of ECHR judgments) in a Country Factsheet Profile - different from the one tracking noteworthy ECHR judgments - for each member State of the CoE.

For Italy, there is a long list of ongoing and closed Supervisions. Of relevance are enacted reforms attributed to closed Supervisions:

"Constitutional reform in 1999 confers constitutional rank to a number of requirements of Article 6 of the Convention (fair trial, adversarial process, equality of arms…).

Additional safeguards in 2001 for persons who made pre-trial statements and subsequently availed themselves of their right to remain silent; the use of such statements require the consent of all interested parties. Besides, it is no longer possible for someone to be convicted on the sole basis of
statements he/she was unable to cross-examine."

Also of interest:

For Italy:
Total number of cases transmitted for supervision since the entry into force of the Convention [26 Oct 1955] = 4120
Total number of cases closed by final resolution = 2004

For the UK (as a comparison):
Total number of cases transmitted for supervision since the entry into force of the Convention [03 Sep 1953] = 434
Total number of cases closed by final resolution = 418

Source:
https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution/country-factsheets
See links to PDFs for the individual States

The reformed Italian Constitution includes the following; provisions relevant to the AK - RS case (because they were violated during one or more of the trial "stages") are highlighted:

Article 111

Jurisdiction is implemented through due process regulated by law.

All court trials are conducted with adversary proceedings and the parties are entitled to equal conditions before an impartial judge in third party position.
The law provides for the reasonable duration of trials.
In criminal law trials, the law provides that the alleged offender shall be promptly informed confidentially of the nature and reasons for the charges that are brought and shall have adequate time and conditions to prepare a defence.
The defendant shall have the right to cross-examine or to have cross-examined before a judge the persons making accusations and to summon and examine persons for the defence in the same conditions as the prosecution, as well as the right to produce all other evidence in favour of the defence.
The defendant is entitled to the assistance of an interpreter in the case that he or she does not speak or understand the language in which the court proceedings are conducted. In criminal law proceedings, the formation of evidence is based on the principle of adversary hearings.
The guilt of the defendant cannot be established on the basis of statements by persons who, out of their own free choice, have always voluntarily avoided undergoing cross-examination by the defendant or the defence counsel.
The law regulates the cases in which the formation of evidence does not occur in an adversary proceeding with the consent of the defendant or owing to reasons of ascertained objective impossibility or proven illicit conduct.

All judicial decisions shall include a statement of reasons.*

Appeals to the Court of Cassation in cases of violations of the law are always allowed against sentences and against measures affecting personal freedom pronounced by ordinary and special courts. This rule can only be waived in cases of sentences by military tribunals in time of war.

Appeals to the Court of Cassation against decisions of the Council of State and the Court of Accounts are permitted only for reasons of jurisdiction.

*Violated because the "reasoning" of the statement of reasons was arbitrary, for example, by including justifications of guilt which presumed physically impossible actions, such as a selective cleanup of DNA evidence.

Source for English text of Italian Constitution, Article 111:

https://www.senato.it/documenti/repository/istituzione/costituzione_inglese.pdf
Click to expand...

Here are some other articles of the Italian Constitution that were violated in the AK - RS case. (There may be other articles in addition to Art. 111 and those in this listing which were violated but which are not included in this listing.)

Art. 24
Anyone may bring cases before a court of law in order to protect their rights
under civil and administrative law.
Defense is an inviolable right at every stage and instance of legal proceedings.*
The poor are entitled by law to proper means for action or defense in all
courts.
The law shall define the conditions and forms of reparation in case of judicial errors.
Art. 25
No case may be removed from the court seized with it as established by law.
No punishment may be inflicted except by virtue of a law in force at the time
the offence was committed.
No restriction may be placed on a person's liberty save for as provided by law.***

Art. 27
Criminal responsibility is personal.
A defendant shall be considered not guilty until a final sentence has been passed.****
Punishments may not be inhuman and shall aim at re-educating the convicted.
Death penalty is prohibited.

Art. 28
Officials of the State or public agencies shall be directly responsible under criminal, civil, and administrative law for acts committed in violation of rights. In such cases, civil liability shall extend to the State and to such public agency.*****

*According to ECHR case-law, legal proceedings in a criminal case include the first questioning of a suspect by the authorities.

**According to ECHR case-law, such laws of compensation are not to be applied in an arbitrary fashion or in a way that violates the presumption of innocence.

***According to ECHR case-law, there must be reasonable suspicion to arrest and detain a person. The arrest is a violation of the Convention unless the grounds of the arrest satisfy both domestic (that is, Italian) law and the case-law of the ECHR under Article 5.

****Violated by the use of the verdict of Guede's short-track trial against Knox and Sollecito.

*****No compensation has been awarded yet to Knox or Sollecito for the violations of their defense rights.
 
acbytesla said:
Oh, you didn't catch the speech a cople of days ago that General Kelly gave defending the Trumpster and lying.
Click to expand...


Does this mean that you defend congresswoman Frederica S. Wilson's calling out Trump for his call to the family of the killed soldier, Sgt. La David Johnson? That, in and of itself, was a despicable attack against someone calling to offer condolences, no matter how well it was handled.
 
sept79 said:
Does this mean that you defend congresswoman Frederica S. Wilson's calling out Trump for his call to the family of the killed soldier, Sgt. La David Johnson? That, in and of itself, was a despicable attack against someone calling to offer condolences, no matter how well it was handled.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, no one is talking about the Benghazi-like bungling of the administration. Trump pivoted into a discussion of "calling Gold Star families" when asked why he'd not addressed the tragedy in Niger.

Which is the parallel to this thread. Instead of talking about there not being any forensics for 2 of the three accused at the crimescene, let's talk about cartwheels and judicial truths from other trials.
 
sept79 said:
Does this mean that you defend congresswoman Frederica S. Wilson's calling out Trump for his call to the family of the killed soldier, Sgt. La David Johnson? That, in and of itself, was a despicable attack against someone calling to offer condolences, no matter how well it was handled.
Click to expand...

The point was truthfulness. I thought the Congresswoman was petty But just as petty was Trump's response to the Congresswoman and even more petty was his attack on former Presidents. Kelly was just proof how low people will go in apologizing for the President. A career General got up and lied for the President? Isn't that despicable? Isn't it despicable that Trump lied about former US Presidents not calling the loved ones?
 
I coulda swore people said they were going to quit the Trump bashing in this thread. I guess when you can't stand someone, it makes you feel good to publicly slam them, right Vixen?
 
abaddon said:
I implied nothing at all, I simply observed a common behaviour.

If you want scurrilous, look to your own...
In one stroke you are claiming that women are all brainless twits whose brains can be induced to dribble out their ears so long as the bloke wears the right after-shave, or in my case, instead-of-shave since I sport at beard. I'm a bloke, and I am deeply offended that you would trivialise the other half of humanity in that way. As a man, I can say that I find this sort of misogyny utterly repulsive.
Click to expand...

That's a sweeping generalisation, isn't it? You've never heard of Anna Smith...?

It is a fact Curt seems to have all these women fighting over him.

Having a beard shouldn't preclude you from dabbing gentlemen's Eu de Cologne over your person.
 
Stacyhs said:
She didn't tell me anything.

If someone has published something on the internet such as her article on Ground Report, then it is available to be used as long as the proper credit is given to the author. Pruett wouldn't have had a leg to stand on and neither would Amazon. But that ain't the way it went down, is it?
Click to expand...


You have been told it was.
 
Stacyhs said:
You have not come right out and said it but you have implied it on many occasions:



Your answer:
Cont 20, #2668




Your answer:

cont 20 #2681

Cont. 23 #1563

#3079 cont 20

You know there is no evidence of AK ever using cocaine, so you resort to this back door spin instead.
Click to expand...

I can't see any quote there where I said Knox was a cocaine user. Her boyfriend on the train was indeed jailed for cocaine smuggling. Fact.
 
Welshman said:
TJMK complained about Amanda hiring a PR firm and the PR campaign waged on behalf of Amanda. TJMK and Vixen slavishly defend Mignini despite the fact Mignini is a total scumbag with a dubious history which meant TJMK was an PR tool for Mignini. Amanda was viciously attacked for using PR but TJMK felt it was perfectly acceptable to provide PR for a corrupt prosecutor. Yet another example of hypocrisy by PGP.
Click to expand...

There is zero evidence Mignini is, or was, corrupt.

A prosecutor prosecutes. That's his job.
 
Stacyhs said:
The prosecution has a ready and willing PR company at their disposal that they don't even have to pay for: the media. The police/prosecutor/"sources close to the prosecution" give the media information that they want published. Naturally, only their side is given to the media. The public reads this and assumes it's all true and accurate without hearing any contradictory evidence. The defense is constantly trying to catch up with this tactic but the harm is already done. This is especially true in the early stages of an investigation. For example, the picture of the "bloody bathroom", the report of the running washing machine, Amanda's "lie" about the Harry Potter book, the "bloody footprints", Amanda smelling of sex, the bleach receipt, etc all swayed the public in the early stages of the investigation toward guilt. The defense is at an absolute disadvantage from day one and, even when the defendants hire someone to help them combat this prosecution advantage, they get attacked and accused of trying to manipulate and sway public opinion. But the police/prosecution are never seen as doing the exact same thing only they don't have to hire anyone and get it all for free.
Click to expand...

The police and the prosecutors are establishment. They get to enforce the law.

There would be no sense prosecuting someone unless you have a fair chance of success.

It's not law enforcement if you don't catch the right people. The police and the prosecutors don't have a say in determining the verdict.
 
Welshman said:
I agree the media provided very effective PR for the prosecution in several ways. The prosecution had friendly journalists such as John Follain. To the best of my knowledge the mainstream media never covered the massive level of corruption by the police/prosecution described in the links below.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contamination-labwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-perjury-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com...old-about-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
Besides the falsehoods fed to the media, the media told their own falsehoods as detailed in the links below
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda-knox-media-lies/

A lot of the media coverage towards Amanda was very hostile as detailed below

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/media.html

Despite the conduct of the media, TJMK complained the media was biased in Amanda’s favour. It shows how stupid and deluded PGP are.

If as Vixen constantly claims, there was a mountain of evidence and a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele, why did the prosecution had to resort to spreading false information to the media regarding bleach receipts, the washing machine running, the Harry Potter books and showering in a bloody bathroom. Why resort to numerous lies if the prosecution had so much evidence and a slam dunk case. There is a golden rule that the prosecution should never have to resort to lying if they have a slam dunk case.

The relationship between the media and the prosecution shows the industrial scale hypocrisy of the PGP. They complain about Amanda’s family using a PR firm but had no problem when the media provided effective PR for corrupt prosecutors. Vixen constantly bangs on about Amanda and Raffaele telling umpteen lies but PGP had no problem with the prosecutors leaking umpteen lies to the media and the media spreading lies about Amanda.
Click to expand...

It is slam dunk the pair committed the crime and there is a mountain of evidence. The merits court found them guilty on evidence BARD and the appeal court upheld the conviction.

Marasca clearly state they annulled the case because of the press coverage and because of flaws in the investigation, neither of which were legal issues in the first place.

Marasca did confirm the kids lied and lied and lied, were there at the murder when it happened, washed off the victim's blood and did cover up for Rudy.
 
Vixen said:
There is zero evidence Mignini is, or was, corrupt.

A prosecutor prosecutes. That's his job.
Click to expand...

Every once in a while the PGP-PR effort badly shows its hand. Defend Mignini even if you have to lie to do it.

During the 2009 trial where he was the prosecutor, Mignini himself was facing criminal abuse of office allegations to do with the Narducci affair. Following his prosecutorial role in the Kercher trials, he was sanctioned for denying Sollecito his rights at interrogation.

One of the main agendas of the PGP-PR machine is to defend Mignini. It would be better if they did it without lying.

Note - after saying there was "no evidence" the campaign will turn to "disputing" this. Which begs the question.....
 
Last edited:
Some posts discussing Forum Management and the MA have been split to FMF Please raise forum management discussions only in the FMF area.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
Vixen said:
Marasca did confirm the kids lied and lied and lied, were there at the murder when it happened, washed off the victim's blood and did cover up for Rudy.
Click to expand...

The PR campaign will simply repeat these long since discredited talking points..... because otherwise they'd have no case.
 
Vixen said:
It is slam dunk the pair committed the crime and there is a mountain of evidence. The merits court found them guilty on evidence BARD and the appeal court upheld the conviction.

Marasca clearly state they annulled the case because of the press coverage and because of flaws in the investigation, neither of which were legal issues in the first place.

Marasca did confirm the kids lied and lied and lied, were there at the murder when it happened, washed off the victim's blood and did cover up for Rudy.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was a slam dunk case with tons of evidence, and everyone that posts here besides you is a delusional moron, but by astonishing coincidence reality has deemed to satisfy our delusions by making the case play out exactly how one would have expected it to play out if it was based on piss poor evidence and prosecution/judicial malfeasance, with multiple acquittals and esteemed outsider consensus that the case was bad. What horrible luck that the physical outcome subverts and defies your secretly correct world view. That is definitely what is going on. Rofl.
 
Vixen said:
That's a sweeping generalisation, isn't it? You've never heard of Anna Smith...?

It is a fact Curt seems to have all these women fighting over him.

Having a beard shouldn't preclude you from dabbing gentlemen's Eu de Cologne over your person.
Click to expand...

No, it is not a fact at all. It's just another baseless claim proffered by those who feel the need to attack Knox's family for their own psychological needs. Not a single shred of evidence has been offered to support this sad and petty claim. It's just more dirt slinging.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom