Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Bob001]

Another helpful site

Another site with extensive factual information about the Knox case, including a detailed analysis by a veteran FBI agent:

w w w.injusticeinperugia.org/index.html
.

 

[stilicho]

Another site with extensive factual information about the Knox case, including a detailed analysis by a veteran FBI agent:

w w w.injusticeinperugia.org/index.html
.

That's Bruce's site. You may address your concerns to both him and Charlie (FOA) on this thread.

Each of those sites are advocacy sites and omit to explain why Amanda, Raffaele, and Rudy were all found guilty unanimously.

 

[Bob001]

About juries in Italy

A description of the Italian legal system from the above site (my highlights):

This trial has highlighted several procedural differences between Italy and the US.

The prosecutor is a powerful figure in Italy. The prosecutor is connected to the judiciary. Prosecutors are not elected or appointed. Prosecutors lead the entire investigation.

Douglas Preston who knows from personal experience, how the system works, had this to say:

"prosecutors are firmly in charge. They tell the police what to look for, where to go, what evidence to analyze, what evidence not to analyze. In America, the police work independently and are specifically trained in evidence gathering and criminal investigation. In Italy, the police must do what the prosecutor tells them. As a result, many criminal investigations in Italy are botched by prosecutors who are judges, trained in the law, who have no background in criminal investigation, police work, or forensic science.”
You can be held in prison in Italy for a year before any charges are even filed against you. This waiting period is not considered time served if you are eventually convicted. The concept of innocent until proven guilty is relatively new in Italy. The concept was written into law in 2006. The simple act of being arrested has a high presumption of guilt attached. This reasoning leads to a very high success rate in the initial ruling of guilt. This also explains the high rate of acquittals during the appeals process.

Jury trials look quite different than US jury trials. When it comes to serious crimes such as murder, eight judges hear the case, two professional judges and six lay judges. The two professional judges guide the jury as it sorts through the facts of the case. One of the professional judges acts as the lead judge and runs the court proceedings. The judge that runs the trial in court is also a member of the jury. The ruling only needs to be a simple majority. You can be sentenced to life in prison on a 5-3 vote.

Keep in mind, the six lay judges are citizens of the town. The six lay judges are chosen at random and are not questioned by the prosecution or the defense before they are chosen.

And there's much more:
w w w.injusticeinperugia.org/Italianjustice.html
.

 

[Fiona]

There are better accounts of the legal system in italy in the preceding thread if you are interested Bob001

This one is quite good I think

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...ustice+italy+process&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

 

[Bruce Fischer]

That's Bruce's site. You may address your concerns to both him and Charlie (FOA) on this thread.

Each of those sites are advocacy sites and omit to explain why Amanda, Raffaele, and Rudy were all found guilty unanimously.

Injustice in Perugia is my website. I will be more than happy to discuss any questions that anyone has. I don't think I have omitted an explanation as suggested above. I think the header on every page explaines it pretty well.

Injustice in Perugia
A site detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito

 

[Danceme]

Welcome Bob001, you are posting these links and quotes as if you think they are new information to us. Most, if not all, of us here are very familiar with the content's of Charlie and Bruce's respective websites.
I strongly suggest you read the threads here to see discussions that have already occurred over quite possibly every single available piece of evidence. This thread you are now on is a continuation of an earlier thread, closed just a few days ago, titled Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel. Here is a link to the beginning of that thread,

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161229

Happy reading!

 

[stilicho]

A description of the Italian legal system from the above site (my highlights):

....

Keep in mind, the six lay judges are citizens of the town. The six lay judges are chosen at random and are not questioned by the prosecution or the defense before they are chosen.

About all you're missing is this:

Six of the jurors were wearing red, white and green sashes -- the colors of Italy's flag.

(Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/04/italy.knox.trial/index.html )

It's surprising that the Italian justice system is perfectly capable of dealing with lifelong Mafia mobsters yet require the guidance of amateur internet sleuths to properly assess a garden-variety murder case.

 

[Fulcanelli]

We have the crimescope photos to show that the substance is possibly semen. One of the shoe prints shows the same substance. This is not a new story. Frank put the photos on his blog a long time ago. It is coming up again because this is one of the points that will be addressed during the appeal.

Photos of Vaseline.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Let's keep going in circles. The substance needs to be tested. The court blocked the test. Why?

You can ignore the actual subject and keep taking apart sentences on JREF if you like but it's a complete waste of time.

I answered that question in my previous posts.

 

[quadraginta]

About all you're missing is this:
Six of the jurors were wearing red, white and green sashes -- the colors of Italy's flag.

<snip>

Nope. He hasn't started explaining yet how Knox was convicted - all because of a cartwheel. jaw-dropp)

I have a premonition about that, though.

 

[Fulcanelli]

you should be ashamed of yourself. You really need to take a break. We are all well aware of what was done to Meredith. Most of us have the decency to show her and her family respect. Using photographs of the crime scene just because you are frustrated on a discussion board really shows your true character. There is a time and a place to use this type of evidence. This was a horrible crime so unfortunately it is necessary to view certain aspects of the crime scene to prove points. this was not the case with your post.

It's perfectly valid. It's a brutal murder we're discussing. If you didn't realise that, then a reality check is exactly what you needed. You and certain others have gone to great lengths to sanitise this crime. To do that is the ultimate lie. But I understand, that you're desperate that people don't see exactly what Amanda is actually accused of doing...hiding the horror, the reality, helps you to disassociate her from it.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mafia

Bob001,

Welcome to JREF. The ILE did not treat this case as a garden-variety murder case; instead, they acted as though they had apprehended the equivalent of a mafia boss in two ways. They paraded Amanda, Patrick, and Raffaele through the streets of Perugia’s old town, which in the memory of one citizen had only happened once before. They also put Amanda’s picture on the wall in Rome near Bernardo Provenzano’s photograph, before she had even been formally charged, which happened almost a year after she had been put into custody.

Charlie’s site and Bruce’s site do a good job of explaining why Rudy was convicted.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I'm sure they would be happy to test it. Have you not been reading? They were denied a request to have it tested and you thought that was just great, oh faux seeker of truth.

Nothing prevented the defence from testing it. Do you not read either?

It doesn't need to be the police or court that have it tested. The defence could have done themselves. They opted not to...deliberately, because they never wanted it tested in the first place,

 

[Fulcanelli]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5978559#post5978559

So it's confirmed that Amanda Knox had no way of knowing that any of her roommates, their friends, or anyone else looking for them for that matter, wouldn't have shown up at any moment at the cottage.

It's what I assumed. And leads to another example of how Per-woo-gia File's dogma needs to embrace the preposterous in order to even superficially make sense.

For I suspect most people will accept that it's rather unlikely that a person- in a house that they share with several other people- would murder someone, then leave and not come back until the next day to try and clean up evidence of the crime.

That's exactly why they needed a story...an excuse for being at the cottage (and doing 'something' else, instead of having raised the alarm immediately) should anyone arrive home.

 

[HumanityBlues]

Were this info from a real source, I could actually believe it. But since you've shown time and time again that you're a liar who makes stuff up constantly, I'll wait for someone more credible to confirm. That also goes for someone willing to state a credible reason why the original investigators couldn't have done it themselves. I'm happy to hear an explanation from someone, but not from Fulcnaelli, because he is a liar.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Let's keep going in circles. The substance needs to be tested. The court blocked the test. Why?

You can ignore the actual subject and keep taking apart sentences on JREF if you like but it's a complete waste of time.

The defence could have tested it themselves, they didn't need the court to test it. That's exactly why the court blocked it. It was a ruse.

 

[LondonJohn]

Bob001,

Welcome to JREF. The ILE did not treat this case as a garden-variety murder case; instead, they acted as though they had apprehended the equivalent of a mafia boss in two ways. They paraded Amanda, Patrick, and Raffaele through the streets of Perugia’s old town, which in the memory of one citizen had only happened once before. They also put Amanda’s picture on the wall in Rome near Bernardo Provenzano’s photograph, before she had even been formally charged, which happened almost a year after she had been put into custody.

Charlie’s site and Bruce’s site do a good job of explaining why Rudy was convicted.

I'm also loving the logic that since the Italian justice system has managed to successfully prosecute major mafia figures, it is therefore unimpeachable and beyond reproach in this case.

Let's draw a parallel: The UK criminal justice system has managed to successfully - and justly - prosecute many armed robbery gangs, serial killers and underworld bosses. But, despite this, it messed up atrociously in its high-profile prosecutions of a notorious rape/murder case (the Rachel Nickell murder), and the perhaps even more notorious murder of a TV star (the Jill Dando case). And these are, of course, only two out of many such examples in the UK.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Hi BobtheDonkey,
I don't know about your thoughts, though I could probably guess,
but the photo that Fulcanelli posted above from ABC News of Miss Kercher's room sure doesn't look like a staged clean-up to me...
Hmmm,
RWVBWL

Nobody argued they cleaned Meredith's bedroom. Why would they do that? The body would still be there...so everyone could see a murder had happened, making it pointless. The clean-up was never intended to remove all trace there'd been a murder...only to delay its discovery and cover up their own involvement in it.

 

[LondonJohn]

Please can I make a point about "certainty" and "opinion".

Some things in this case can be stated as certain fact, without any qualification. Examples might include "There was a bloody partial footprint on the blue bathmat", or "Knox and Sollecito were convicted of murder in the first trial". There are, however, other things which need to be qualified as opinion, rather than absolute fact. Examples might include "It was a ruse" or "the stain was Vaseline". It would be more helpful and more appropriate if everyone could properly qualify those areas which are merely opinion.....

 

[GrouchoMarxist]

Nope. He hasn't started explaining yet how Knox was convicted - all because of a cartwheel. jaw-dropp)

I have a premonition about that, though.

6th December 2009, 10:44 pm