Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Kestrel]

Now, back to the case Halides and Kestrel: there has never been any indication from Raffaele or his legal team that he was threatened, mistreated, tricked, abused or otherwise made to give statements to police or to the high court judges that were untruthful.

Raffaele had Italian lawyers who understand the system. Claiming police or prosecutorial misconduct in a situation where it's your word against theirs is a no win situation. In Perugia, you can count on being sued for slander and even criminal defamation for making such an accusation.

All you need to do is look at what happened to Amanda after she made such charges. Or what happened to her parents for merely repeating their daughters words. Or what happened to members of the press when they dared say something bad about prosecutor Mignini.

Can you explain why no recordings exist of Raffaele, Amanda and Patrick's interrogations?

Considering that the Perugia authorities bugged the jail cells of the defendants, recorded their phone calls, conversations with their lawyers and tapped phones belonging to family members it's hard to believe they didn't record the interrogations.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Raffaele had Italian lawyers who understand the system. Claiming police or prosecutorial misconduct in a situation where it's your word against theirs is a no win situation. In Perugia, you can count on being sued for slander and even criminal defamation for making such an accusation.

All you need to do is look at what happened to Amanda after she made such charges. Or what happened to her parents for merely repeating their daughters words. Or what happened to members of the press when they dared say something bad about prosecutor Mignini.

Can you explain why no recordings exist of Raffaele, Amanda and Patrick's interrogations?

Considering that the Perugia authorities bugged the jail cells of the defendants, recorded their phone calls, conversations with their lawyers and tapped phones belonging to family members it's hard to believe they didn't record the interrogations.

Well, when the accusations are defamatory and false, yes...you can be sued. The same thing happens here in the U.S., quite often actually.

What, Amanda thought she could ruin one man's life by falsely accusing him and get away with it?

Some angel you have there, Kestrel.

 

[Kestrel]

Well, when the accusations are defamatory and false, yes...you can be sued. The same thing happens here in the U.S., quite often actually.

What, Amanda thought she could ruin one man's life by falsely accusing him and get away with it?

Some angel you have there, Kestrel.

It was rather clear that I was talking about the defamation suits filed by Mignini against Amanda. But apparently I was overestimating the reading skills of some posters.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

It was rather clear that I was talking about the defamation suits filed by Mignini against Amanda. But apparently I was overestimating the reading skills of some posters.

No, I got that.

That was the

Well, when the accusations are defamatory and false, yes...you can be sued.

bit

 

[tsig]

Fear.

Raffaele had been telling the police that Amanda spent the night of Nov. 1 with him.

Then the police lie to him and claim they have evidence proving that Amanda was at the cottage at the time of the murder. They tell Raffaele that if he continues to provide an alibi for Amanda, he will be a co-conspirator and spend the next 30 years in jail for protecting a girl that he has knows for less than two week. Being rather young, naive and isolated from legal advice, Raffaele changed his story out of fear.

Later, after getting some legal advice, he went back to his original story.

For those of you thinking Raffaele should have kept to the truth and trusted the system, did you know that only 16% of Italians fully trust the Italian legal system?

Red herring.

The trust of the Italian people in their system of justice is not the issue.

 

[stilicho]

All you need to do is look at what happened to Amanda after she made such charges. Or what happened to her parents for merely repeating their daughters words. Or what happened to members of the press when they dared say something bad about prosecutor Mignini.

You conveniently forget that Italian prosecutors and police are protected from defamation as ordinary citizens. Has nothing to do with abuse of power or anything else.

In Canada we can say any unsupported thing about the police that we want without any reason to support it. Colin Thatcher, who murdered his ex-wife, filled his book with unsupported allegations against individuals and there was no recourse for the police or prosecutor to defend themselves.

Can you explain why no recordings exist of Raffaele, Amanda and Patrick's interrogations?

Because they didn't record them?

You know, Kestrel, that although studies of police departments in North America have proved that recordings actually help the interrogations, not all jurisdictions use them. Where they do, they have found (for one) that suspects are much clearer and quicker in their statements. Recordings help the investigators and not the suspects.

Considering that the Perugia authorities bugged the jail cells of the defendants, recorded their phone calls, conversations with their lawyers and tapped phones belonging to family members it's hard to believe they didn't record the interrogations.

Argument from incredulity. Or, as we like to call it, Kestrel's Befuddlement Syndrome.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

duplicate message to below

 

[Chris_Halkides]

analysis of the DNA results

I believe we are still waiting for some evidence that the defense has protested the failure of the prosecution to supply them with required information, or even that such a failure occurred. What evidence can you prove was denied to the defense by the prosecution by the time the case was complete?

How are you certain what has been released and to whom? Do you feel that a testing facility is obligated to supply any party at all with any information that is asked for, any time they feel the urge to ask for it? Are you suggesting that this is standard practice somewhere?

*************

One thing caught my attention in the article you cited. You had suggested earlier in this discussion that the defense's failure to be present at the DNA testing was of no consequence, because they would not have been able to observe the subsequent analysis, which was the important aspect.

The article says,

Would the presence of defense experts at the time of testing not have been helpful in addressing the apparently critical (to Sara Gino) nature of that issue?

Quadraginta,

I have cited three news articles, all of which appeared in the fall of 2009, all of which were consistent with the notion that the prosecution did not release all of the information. In addition, we know that the defense asked for a mistrial on these and other grounds. One piece of evidence that the fsa files were not released is indirect. We know that Johnson, Hampikian, and their co-signers do not have them, and one strongly suspects that the defense team would release them, because the arguments in the letter are consistent with arguments made by the expert witnesses called by the defense at the trial. But Chris Mellas also stated that they were not released, along with other information ordered by the court to be released in the summer and requested by the defense earlier than that. When I raised Mr. Mellas’s comments previously, Fulcanelli attacked Mr. Mellas’s credibility, but Fulcanelli did not offer any facts or reasons to support his charge. My comments at this stage are intended as an interim report only.

There were hundreds of DNA samples run. To have a lawyer present for running all of the samples would engender an extremely large legal bill, as pointed out in Darkness Descending. It makes more sense to release the fsa files. This would allow the defense expert witnesses to ask and answer questions such as, “Were Stefanoni’s thresholds always set to < 20 RFUs, or was this standard employed for only some samples,” or perhaps, “How did Stefanoni descriminate between real peaks and blobs or stutters?” It is not just the observation of the analysis that is critical, it is the ability of the defense to do its own independent analysis.

Chris

 

[stilicho]

There were hundreds of DNA samples run. To have a lawyer present for running all of the samples would engender an extremely large legal bill, as pointed out in Darkness Descending. It makes more sense to release the fsa files. This would allow the defense expert witnesses to ask and answer questions such as, “Were Stefanoni’s thresholds always set to < 20 RFUs, or was this standard employed for only some samples,” or perhaps, “How did Stefanoni descriminate between real peaks and blobs or stutters?” It is not just the observation of the analysis that is critical, it is the ability of the defense to do its own independent analysis.

As large as David Marriott's? I would like you to provide evidence for this. Does David Marriott work that cheap?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Raffaele's alibi

And shortly after that, this time in front of the high court, he went back to his alibi that Amanda was not in his flat.

That's the last we've heard from Raffaele's team on this subject.

Kermit,

With respect to message #5553, Sollecito’s alibi and Knox’s alibi were linked as of September 2009.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...8680234&page=2
“Sollecito's computer is an important element in his alibi for the night of the murder because he said he was at his house with Knox the night Kercher was killed, watching a movie and using his computer. Kercher was last seen alive around 9 p.m. on the night of Nov. 1, and her body was found at noon the following day. While police experts have testified that there was no human interaction on Sollecito's computer after 9:10 p.m. Nov. 1, 2007, when Sollecito finished watching the movie "Amelie" until the following morning at 5:42 a.m., computer technician Antonio D'Ambrosio said that an examination of a copy of Sollecito's hard drive showed that his computer connected with a provider for four seconds at 00:58 -- two-minutes before 1 a.m. -- Nov. 2.
D'Ambrosio confirmed that he found no other sign of human interaction with the computer after that until 5:42 a.m. when an application on the computer crashed. He did maintain, however, that there were indications that Sollecito might have watched a second film on his computer that night, since he had downloaded different copies of "Stardust" from the Internet, eventually saving just one.” Thanks to the investigators, we have lost the information on when Stardust was downloaded.

Chris

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Raffaele's interrogation

Now, back to the case Halides and Kestrel: there has never been any indication from Raffaele or his legal team that he was threatened, mistreated, tricked, abused or otherwise made to give statements to police or to the high court judges that were untruthful.

Kermit,

With respect to message #5557, perhaps his lawyers were afraid that such an allegation would not be investigated properly, or would even result in a defamation charge.

“When human rights activists report episodes of violence or abuse of power being perpetrated by rogue officers to local or national institutions, a worrying phenomenon nearly always takes place. Instead of collecting precise reports of the episodes in order to investigate and identify those responsible for the abuse, the superiors shut up like a clam, denying without question that such disgraceful acts could have taken place. They assume a threatening tone with the associations and threaten to report them for slander, libel and defamation etc. This attitude, which the leaders of EveryOne themselves have witnessed on several occasions, prevents the rogue officers being isolated and their behaviour discouraged. On the contrary, it makes them feel part of an agency in which they are allowed to act above the law using violence, threats and acts of gratuitous coercion. According to the activists, after reporting misconduct by uniformed police officers towards racial minorities, it is not rare for the activists themselves to be followed by plain clothes policemen or summoned to police stations or headquarters and “advised” not to take any further action.”

www.statewatch.org/.../EveryOne - Report Police Violence in Italy_ENG.pdf

Even Colonel Garofano, a prosecution-friendly commentator on the case has issues with the interrogations:

“As a lawman, the independent forensics expert Luciano Garofano should have been satisfied that justice had been done. Having retired from the Carabinieri as a Major-General a fortnight earlier, he should have been relaxing. But niggling doubts disturbed his peace of mind. Had the police been duplicitous at the start by treating the ‘unofficial’ suspects, Amanda and Raffaele as plain witnesses? Had they bypassed the law to elicit a false confession? Had the seasoned detectives thrown them enough rope, knowing that they would hang themselves—especially without a lawyer being present? Sollecito was questioned as a witness but his knife and shoes were taken away as though her was a suspect. Both were kept in solitary confinement without proper documentation. The Supreme Court had quashed convictions for much less.”

p. 433, Darkness Descending (Russell and Johnson).

Chris

 

[stilicho]

[Computer] technician Antonio D'Ambrosio said that an examination of a copy of Sollecito's hard drive showed that his computer connected with a provider for four seconds at 00:58 -- two-minutes before 1 a.m. -- Nov. 2.

We already went through that. Fulcanelli established that, regardless of the independence of D'Ambrosio's testimony, the prosecution was unconcerned about the activity on Sollecito's equipment after he helped murder Meredith.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

legal bill

As large as David Marriott's? I would like you to provide evidence for this. Does David Marriott work that cheap?

The reference to the issue of the legal bill is on page 367 of Darkness Descending.

 

[stilicho]

...using violence, threats and acts of gratuitous coercion...

None of which happened. AK said so herself in her court testimony.

Halides1, I thought you were the DNA guy. What are you doing advocating for things outside of your area of self-proclaimed expertise? You've ordinarily confined yourself to posting irrelevant articles about the Houston crime lab and the Duke lacrosse case.

Do you have more at stake than simply your "sciency" allegations?

 

[stilicho]

The reference to the issue of the legal bill is on page 367 of Darkness Descending.

Does Marriott work cheaper than asking a junior firm member to accompany a DNA scientist to a laboratory for a one-time look-see? Show your work.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Kermit,

With respect to message #5557, perhaps his lawyers were afraid that such an allegation would not be investigated properly, or would even result in a defamation charge.

“When human rights activists report episodes of violence or abuse of power being perpetrated by rogue officers to local or national institutions, a worrying phenomenon nearly always takes place. Instead of collecting precise reports of the episodes in order to investigate and identify those responsible for the abuse, the superiors shut up like a clam, denying without question that such disgraceful acts could have taken place. They assume a threatening tone with the associations and threaten to report them for slander, libel and defamation etc. This attitude, which the leaders of EveryOne themselves have witnessed on several occasions, prevents the rogue officers being isolated and their behaviour discouraged. On the contrary, it makes them feel part of an agency in which they are allowed to act above the law using violence, threats and acts of gratuitous coercion. According to the activists, after reporting misconduct by uniformed police officers towards racial minorities, it is not rare for the activists themselves to be followed by plain clothes policemen or summoned to police stations or headquarters and “advised” not to take any further action.”

www.statewatch.org/.../EveryOne - Report Police Violence in Italy_ENG.pdf

Even Colonel Garofano, a prosecution-friendly commentator on the case has issues with the interrogations:

“As a lawman, the independent forensics expert Luciano Garofano should have been satisfied that justice had been done. Having retired from the Carabinieri as a Major-General a fortnight earlier, he should have been relaxing. But niggling doubts disturbed his peace of mind. Had the police been duplicitous at the start by treating the ‘unofficial’ suspects, Amanda and Raffaele as plain witnesses? Had they bypassed the law to elicit a false confession? Had the seasoned detectives thrown them enough rope, knowing that they would hang themselves—especially without a lawyer being present? Sollecito was questioned as a witness but his knife and shoes were taken away as though her was a suspect. Both were kept in solitary confinement without proper documentation. The Supreme Court had quashed convictions for much less.”

p. 433, Darkness Descending (Russell and Johnson).

Chris

So, not only is all DNA evidence compromised by contamination, so all testimony of any suspect is compromised by abusive interrogators.

Right?

 

[quadraginta]

Quadraginta,

I have cited three news articles, all of which appeared in the fall of 2009, all of which were consistent with the notion that the prosecution did not release all of the information. In addition, we know that the defense asked for a mistrial on these and other grounds. One piece of evidence that the fsa files were not released is indirect. We know that Johnson, Hampikian, and their co-signers do not have them, and one strongly suspects that the defense team would release them, because the arguments in the letter are consistent with arguments made by the expert witnesses called by the defense at the trial. But Chris Mellas also stated that they were not released, along with other information ordered by the court to be released in the summer and requested by the defense earlier than that. When I raised Mr. Mellas’s comments previously, Fulcanelli attacked Mr. Mellas’s credibility, but Fulcanelli did not offer any facts or reasons to support his charge. My comments at this stage are intended as an interim report only.

So you're saying you don't have any evidence you can prove was denied to the defense by the prosecution by the time the case was complete?

There were hundreds of DNA samples run. To have a lawyer present for running all of the samples would engender an extremely large legal bill, as pointed out in Darkness Descending. It makes more sense to release the fsa files. This would allow the defense expert witnesses to ask and answer questions such as, “Were Stefanoni’s thresholds always set to < 20 RFUs, or was this standard employed for only some samples,” or perhaps, “How did Stefanoni descriminate between real peaks and blobs or stutters?” It is not just the observation of the analysis that is critical, it is the ability of the defense to do its own independent analysis.

This is the question I asked.

Would the presence of defense experts at the time of testing not have been helpful in addressing the apparently critical (to Sara Gino) nature of that issue?

No part of your paragraph above is a response to that question. A "yes" would have been, or a "no". Once again, an evasion instead of an answer.

I do note with some interest that you equate having a "lawyer" present at the testing with having an "expert" present. I would not consider the two to be equivalent, and am rather surprised that you do.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

“As a lawman, the independent forensics expert Luciano Garofano should have been satisfied that justice had been done. Having retired from the Carabinieri as a Major-General a fortnight earlier, he should have been relaxing. But niggling doubts disturbed his peace of mind. Had the police been duplicitous at the start by treating the ‘unofficial’ suspects, Amanda and Raffaele as plain witnesses?

<snip>

Great stuff here. A true crime author describes someone as having "niggling doubts". There's a real indictment for you.

Even more chilling. The "niggling doubts" are that the Italian police might have behaved as every American LE is trained and encouraged to do. I suppose this is intended as another blast against primitive Italian justice?

That's if it ever happened, of course. A fact not demonstrated to be in evidence except in the wishful thinking of certain interested parties.

A far more compelling case can be offered that the two simply lied their way into the suspect spotlight. No evil machinations by unscrupulous police required.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Raffaele had Italian lawyers who understand the system. Claiming police or prosecutorial misconduct in a situation where it's your word against theirs is a no win situation. In Perugia, you can count on being sued for slander and even criminal defamation for making such an accusation.

All you need to do is look at what happened to Amanda after she made such charges. Or what happened to her parents for merely repeating their daughters words. Or what happened to members of the press when they dared say something bad about prosecutor Mignini.

Can you explain why no recordings exist of Raffaele, Amanda and Patrick's interrogations?

Considering that the Perugia authorities bugged the jail cells of the defendants, recorded their phone calls, conversations with their lawyers and tapped phones belonging to family members it's hard to believe they didn't record the interrogations.

But you are not alleging Raffaele was hit. What you are alleging the police said ti him isn't actually illegal and therefore if they 'had' said those kinds of things to him, there would be no chance of he or his lawyers being sued for slander...that only happens when you accuse someone of committing a 'crime'.

Also, your explanation is pants. Amanda too had Italian lawyers who 'understood the system', very good lawyers I might add, yet that didn't stop her claiming she was hit...several times, twice in court! Therefore, none of your reasoning for your conclusion that such things were said to Raffaele and why neither he or his lawyers in over two and half years mentioned so much as a dickie bird about add up. It is pure desperation on your part.

As for the recordings, as you've been told a thousand times, but I'll bring it up to a thousand and one just for you, witness statements are not recorded. Further, 'if' the police ever do choose to record a witness statement, legally they can only be used for the police departments own records and to further the investigation, not the prosecution, since they are not recognised under Italian law as a legal document. They can therefore not be included in any case file submitted to judges or or defenders, they certainly under Italian law cannot be admitted into court as evidence (the law exists to protect the witness) and they certainly can't be made public. So, you are in effect demanding the impossible because a) the recordings do not exist and b) were any such recording in existence, the law forbids their admission.

You also obviously need reminding that the defence teams had the statements ruled inadmissible, both by the Italian High Court and the Cort De Assize. Yet, you seem to be demanding that both these courts be over ruled, Italian law be over ruled and broken, the defenders be over ruled in what they themselves wanted and won, to produce something that doesn't actually exist, simply to please an anonymous blowhard on a message board in a foreign country thousands of miles away to satisfy his whim in wanting to prove something he has zero evidence for. No arrogance or anything...

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Stilicho writes:

This has always been the problem with Sollecito's alibis. He wants it both ways at once.

But I didn't quote Sollecito. I quoted Matteini.