Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

I'm open to the very good possibility that Lumumba did say those things in his interview with the Mail. And if they have proof of that... then on what grounds is he going to sue?

My argument ran more against your conclusion that the fact that Lumumba didn't sue The Mail could only (or very likely) mean that he was in fact beaten while he was interrogated.

I provided you with an alternative scenario which is just as likely and which explains why none of the parties involved (The Mail, Lumumba and ILE) is following this up.

No, I was agreeing that in this scenario Lumumba would not be able to sue. My original argument around Lumumba suing was to say that surely he would sue if he HADN'T said those things. I then therefore concluded that the reason he didn't sue was that he actually DID say them - which is exactly in line with what you say above.

I take on board that there are more plausible reasons why Lumumba might have made these accusations to the Mail (i.e. other than the accusations being accurate). And, as you alluded to earlier, chief amongst those might be money. But I personally believe that not even the offer of substantial additional money would make Lumumba make such extreme false claims on the record. After all, in this scenario, the Mail journalist would have had to suggest to Lumumba that he could only make "real" money from the interview if he gave them something really juicy about the Perugia police's treatment of him. And also, bear in mind, Lumumba still had to live and work in Perugia, so he'd have known that any false allegation against the police (even if for money) could have very serious ramifications for him.


Anyhow, if Lumumba DID make these allegations to the Mail, then there is still a wide open door for the Perugia police to take action against the Mail - IN SPITE OF Lumumba's subsequent claim that he didn't make those accusations. This is because the Mail, as a published Newspaper, has made unretracted allegations against the Perugia police, via an interview with a third party (Lumumba). Unless and until the Mail prints a correction of Lumumba's views and a retraction of the implications, it can (and should, in my view) be pursued by the Perugia police. Unless the claims were true, of course.......................

 

[Fiona]

Oh dear. Here's a rather massive irony for you:

Which individuals did Amanda Knox identify in her claims that she was hit during her interrogation? Isn't she currently standing trial for slander in relation to those claims? Who are the plaintiffs in this slander trial? Can you see how this directly contradicts your argument?

Of course "the police" can't sue you. But even if individuals are not named in the potential libel/slander, a defined group of people (here, those police officers who took part in the interrogation) most definitely can form a plaintiff group. And that's what could and would happen if the Perugia police similarly decided to bring an action in the Lumumba/Mail case.

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing..........

The uk is not italy. Clearly in Italy the police can sue. They cannot sue in the uk. So no, I don't see any contradiction at all. You are correct that a group can do so: it is in the link I gave you. I do not think the police can do that either for they appear to be a specific exclusion. If you can find the particular legal clause which allows the police to form such a group i will be interested: I have not been able to find it.

 

[HumanityBlues]

I think you are mixing up things a little. The suit against the Mail (either by Lumumba or ILE) would have to go through the courts in the UK.

The Knox slander suit plays out in Italy.

So it's quit possilbe that ILE can't sue in the UK, while they can Italy.

If Mignini can sue the West Seattle Herald in Italy, then the Daily Mail can be sued in Italy as well.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I found it interesting, what Amanda said in Court, on Tuesday. "I didn't mean to accuse anyone". Errm, but she did. Then she states" Why are they always accusing me?". Errm, Amanda, they are accusing you of slander, because YOU accused them of hitting you. People are entitled to defend themselves from accusations. Just as Amanda and Raffaele were entitled to defend themselves. And, by ACCUSING Patrick, she received an extra year in prison. Had Amanda been able to identify her *abuser* then there would have been some crdibility. Amanda seems to have perfect recall of everything that happened in her interrogation.why not that very important issue. Anyone know how many of the police were female, by the way?

Amanda did not say anything in court on Tuesday and Pisa wasn't there.

 

[LondonJohn]

I think you are mixing up things a little. The suit against the Mail (either by Lumumba or ILE) would have to go through the courts in the UK.

The Knox slander suit plays out in Italy.

So it's quit possilbe that ILE can't sue in the UK, while they can Italy.

No, the Perugia police CAN sue in the UK if they want to. A plaintiff group would comprise all those police who were involved in the arrest and interrogation of Lumumba. I am sure I am not "mixing things up a little".

By the way, where has this "ILE" shorthand come from? Does it denote a higher level of knowledge? Should we now refer to the Perugia police station as the "Questura di Perugia"? Can't we call the Perugia police the Perugia police (unless we are Italians talking in Italian)?

 

[Malkmus]

It would be nice if those who claim that Lumumba retracted those statements publicly could also cite specifically what his words were. Was it as simple as "I never said that", or did he go into more detail. There are some youtube interviews with him out there but I don't speak Italian, and therefore don't know if he mentions the police's treatment of him. But I would assume that since some on here claim to know what he said that they know specifically what he said. Or I would hope anyway.

On a side note, I was very surprised this morning to find that one of my co-workers was a student at the same University as Amanda and lived in Perugia back in the nineties. He has a passing knowledge of the case, and doesn't have a personal opinion on her guilt or innocence. However, it is his opinion that she doesn't have a chance with any of her appeals and that the cards were stacked against her from the beginning, which he bases on a rather negative perception of Perugian LE, the press, and the Italian judicial system overall. I only mention this last part to show that it isn't just armchair critics who have never been to Italy who think this.

 

[Amazer]

No, I was agreeing that in this scenario Lumumba would not be able to sue. My original argument around Lumumba suing was to say that surely he would sue if he HADN'T said those things. I then therefore concluded that the reason he didn't sue was that he actually DID say them - which is exactly in line with what you say above.

And if he DID say them, then there is still a wide open door for the Perugia police to take action against the Mail - IN SPITE OF Lumumba's subsequent claim that he didn't make those accusations. This is because the Mail, as a published Newspaper, has made unretracted allegations against the Perugia police, via an interview with a third party (Lumumba). Unless and until the Mail prints a correction of Lumumba's views and a retraction of the implications, it can (and should, in my view) be pursued by the Perugia police. Unless the claims were true, of course.......................

My (educated) guess would be that ILE isn't going to waste resources on getting a story retracted in a newspaper that hardly anyone in Italy reads, even if they could sue for libel/slander in the UK.

The gains, if any, when ILE is successful in the trial are so small that it's not worth the effort and resources.

 

[HumanityBlues]

My (educated) guess would be that ILE isn't going to waste resources on getting a story retracted in a newspaper that hardly anyone in Italy reads, even if they could sue for libel/slander in the UK.

The gains, if any, when ILE is successful in the trial are so small that it's not worth the effort and resources.

How many people in Italy read the West Seattle Herald?

 

[LondonJohn]

If Mignini can sue the West Seattle Herald in Italy, then the Daily Mail can be sued in Italy as well.

That's also true. The blur of internet publication has got the World's libel communities in a mild panic. The fact is, of course, that the Mail article could easily have been viewed online in Italy, thereby justifying a libel action there.

This cross-border nature of publication has contributed to an explosion in so-called "libel tourism". Ironically, this has pushed many libel cases of dubious geographic justifiability to the UK - where libel laws are generally regarded as among the strictest in the World. As a plaintiff, therefore, if you had a chance to choose between the UK and most other countries (including Italy) to bring a libel action, you'd usually choose the UK.

 

[Amazer]

No, the Perugia police CAN sue in the UK if they want to. A plaintiff group would comprise all those police who were involved in the arrest and interrogation of Lumumba. I am sure I am not "mixing things up a little".

By the way, where has this "ILE" shorthand come from? Does it denote a higher level of knowledge? Should we now refer to the Perugia police station as the "Questura di Perugia"? Can't we call the Perugia police the Perugia police (unless we are Italians talking in Italian)?

Short for Italian Law Enforcement was my guess..... and it's short and easy, a lot less typing.

 

[LondonJohn]

My (educated) guess would be that ILE isn't going to waste resources on getting a story retracted in a newspaper that hardly anyone in Italy reads, even if they could sue for libel/slander in the UK.

The gains, if any, when ILE is successful in the trial are so small that it's not worth the effort and resources.

".....when ILE is successful in the trial...."

Nice arguing there

 

[Amazer]

".....when ILE is successful in the trial...."

Nice arguing there

Oops...

I guess you better get out of the way.... some major bias passing by there.

I really have to start working on writing better worded sentences.

 

[LondonJohn]

Short for Italian Law Enforcement was my guess..... and it's short and easy, a lot less typing.

Maybe - but "police" is only three more characters, and there's no need to hold down the shift button. And "police" is a term that everyone understands easily, as opposed to what looks to me to be deliberate and avoidable jargon....

 

[LondonJohn]

Oops...

I guess you better get out of the way.... some major bias passing by there.

I really have to start working on writing better worded sentences.

Your grace is refreshing and welcome to me! I hope I would reply in the same way in similar circumstances.

 

[Amazer]

How many people in Italy read the West Seattle Herald?

How many people from the Seattle area are spending a lot of time in Italy?

 

[Amazer]

Maybe - but "police" is only three more characters, and there's no need to hold down the shift button. And "police" is a term that everyone understands easily, as opposed to what looks to me to be deliberate and avoidable jargon....

In my latest line of work I come across abbreviations (some well known... others very obscure) every day. So i pick them way to easily.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

It is like quoting from the bible, but in this case only the "insiders" have the bible. The rest of us just have to take it on faith. We see through that glass darkly but when the translated report is released it will all become clear. At present we have only the dark and dreaded google glass of misunderstanding. Us outsiders are just poor unfortunate souls.

Then again, there is always Frank to fall back on. If anything reads like a good old King James version of the case, it is his place.

Fulcanelli posted one excerpt from the PMF translation, and it was almost as opaque as the google translation. I don't fault PMF for this, because I have read other material they have translated, and they do a good job. It seems to me Massei has intentionally made his document hard to understand.

 

[Bob001]

Do we know this one thing?

Slight digression. In reading back over some (but not all, so far) of this thread and the previous one, it appears that the single fundamental dispute is whether or not Knox and Sollecito participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that Rudy Guede participated in her murder? In other words, is the key dispute over whether Guede killed her alone, or whether he was helped by Knox and Sollecito? Or does anybody think that Guede was falsely convicted? (I'm having some trouble separating undisputed facts from speculations, allegations and misconceptions. Pinning down the Guede matter seems like a good place to start.) If we are certain that Guede was involved, what evidence is there that Knox and Sollecito (or even just one of them) knew him before the night of the murder? (Personally, I find it impossible to believe that two college students with no criminal pasts plotted murder with a stranger.)

 

[LondonJohn]

The uk is not italy. Clearly in Italy the police can sue. They cannot sue in the uk. So no, I don't see any contradiction at all. You are correct that a group can do so: it is in the link I gave you. I do not think the police can do that either for they appear to be a specific exclusion. If you can find the particular legal clause which allows the police to form such a group i will be interested: I have not been able to find it.

No - the linked article clearly says that "the police" as an entire entity cannot sue - in the way that "The Daily Telegraph Group plc" or "BP plc" can sue.

The article also explicitly states that police officers can sue individually. But if you're interpreting the article as saying that police officers cannot take part as plaintiffs in group actions, then I think you're misreading the article.

The point here is that the UK High Court would almost certainly accept that Lumumba's claims of being punched and kicked by "the police" during his interrogation could only apply to those specific officers who had been involved in his interrogation, and not the "the police" in general. So either each individual officer could sue simultaneously but separately (since the assault claims clearly could have been directed at him/her), or the interrogating officers could sue as a group, claiming joint and separate defamation. The "class size" of the plaintiffs in this instance (4-8 officers, I'd guess) would easily pass the legal test regarding group claims.

To re-iterate, police officers CAN sue in the UK. And they can sue even if they are not mentioned by name in the statements being judged for libel - provided that the potential plaintiff class size is not too large.

 

[Fiona]

It would be nice if those who claim that Lumumba retracted those statements publicly could also cite specifically what his words were. Was it as simple as "I never said that", or did he go into more detail. There are some youtube interviews with him out there but I don't speak Italian, and therefore don't know if he mentions the police's treatment of him. But I would assume that since some on here claim to know what he said that they know specifically what he said. Or I would hope anyway.

On a side note, I was very surprised this morning to find that one of my co-workers was a student at the same University as Amanda and lived in Perugia back in the nineties. He has a passing knowledge of the case, and doesn't have a personal opinion on her guilt or innocence. However, it is his opinion that she doesn't have a chance with any of her appeals and that the cards were stacked against her from the beginning, which he bases on a rather negative perception of Perugian LE, the press, and the Italian judicial system overall. I only mention this last part to show that it isn't just armchair critics who have never been to Italy who think this.

I have no Italian and do not know what he said specifically about brutality. But there is at least some information at post 2279 in the previous thread.

http://www.internationalskeptics.co...ght=lumumba+faith+italian+justice#post5547224

It would be better if someone could translate the interviews, though