Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Solange305]

That having been said, I would encourage them, and indeed lurkers from PMF, to come on in because the water is fine. The discussion would be more valuable with all points of view represented. Let’s have a civil competition among ideas.

No Halides1, the water is NOT fine. You have a couple of posters who purposely go out of their way to incite anyone who disagrees with them, in order to get them banned or suspended. Even those who don't use those tactics, seem to be perfectly content to allow others to continue to do so without speaking up. If that is what you call a civil competition among ideas, you are being absolutely disingenuous.

 

[el buscador]

Hello Everyone,

I'm new here and reading up, though seeing this post by Supernaut, wanted to comment. Rudy's sentence was cut in half because he opted for the fast track trial, something neither Amanda nor Raffaele did. The sentence was cut in half upon appeal, which is likely what Biscotti hoped for and why he (some might say wisely) advised his client to go for the fast track. Note that had Amanda or Raffaele opted for the fast track trial, they too would have had their sentences reduced. I'm not saying I think it is right, but to imply Mignini et al gave Rudy a gift of appreciation is not factually correct.

Looking forward to being here, though by the amount of posts on a given day here, will have to spend much more time on the computer than I normally do!

Hi, Maya C, welcome to JREF.

My question would be, why would an innocent person want to do a fast track trial? From what I've read there are limitations to what can be brought up in a fast track trial.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Excuse me? What is it, specifically, about the video or LJ's comments that leaves you incredulous?

Possibly the part I 'Highlighted'

 

[Maya C]

Maya C, Are they still discussing the old fast-track topic. I would have thought that had been well established.

Hello Colonel,

I don't know so much that it was a discussion, but Supernaut's post jumped out at me as what seemed to be a misunderstanding as to why Rudy received a lesser sentence.

 

[Maya C]

Hi, Maya C, welcome to JREF.

My question would be, why would an innocent person want to do a fast track trial? From what I've read there are limitations to what can be brought up in a fast track trial.

Hello, El Buscador, and thank you so much for the warm welcome.

I wish I could answer your question! There are indeed limitations for the fast track. This isn't legal speak at all, but to my way of thinking, it seems a path of least resistance? Maybe it would be a good option for someone (and I'm not talking Rudy here as I don't for one moment believe him to be innocent) who doesn't have the funds for a long drawn-out trial or maybe someone who doesn't have the proverbial snowball's chance due to whatever reason. I don't think that answers your question at all, but those are the only reasons I can think of why someone innocent would opt for this.

Again, thanks for your welcome.

 

[colonelhall]

I think that the "fast track" theme comes up regularly because there are those who try to give the impression that Guede has been treated with more leniency than the other two. These posters conveniently forget the "fast track" business. Hence discussions go on and on for ever. Witness the length of this thread.
I used to drop in occasionally for some intelligent discussion, but now that Fioana and Fulcanelli have gone, it hardly worthwhile.
Somebody told me that they are still discussing the staged break-in. I thought that the staging was well established and that even Knox supporters agree with this. Topics like this just keep going round and round.

 

[Chris C]

loverofzion,

There have been many questions and comments directed toward you in the last month or so, and virtually all of them have gone unansered. I would be grateful to you if you would tend to this unfinished business.

BTW, Rudy originally identified the stranger who allegedly killed Meredith as being left handed. Raffaele is right handed.

Yeah the stranger also had black hair and was following them as he walked Meredith home. Oh wait, then he says he arrived before Meredith got home and went downstairs to see if the guys where there. Thus explaining his presence outside of Filomena's window. However, no matter what crazy statement Guede has given, he has always claimed that Meredith let him in and he was on the toilet when she was killed.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I think that the "fast track" theme comes up regularly because there are those who try to give the impression that Guede has been treated with more leniency than the other two. These posters conveniently forget the "fast track" business. Hence discussions go on and on for ever. Witness the length of this thread.
I used to drop in occasionally for some intelligent discussion, but now that Fioana and Fulcanelli have gone, it hardly worthwhile.
Somebody told me that they are still discussing the staged break-in. I thought that the staging was well established and that even Knox supporters agree with this. Topics like this just keep going round and round.

Hi colonelhall,

Now that you mention it, the "staged break-in" theory was discussed recently and quite obliterated, TBH. It seems no one tries to defend it anymore. You may step in if you wish, but it would be best to review the last few pages first. I'm sure you don't want to repeat already discredited arguments just to keep it going round and round

 

[Justinian2]

Hello, El Buscador, and thank you so much for the warm welcome.

I wish I could answer your question! There are indeed limitations for the fast track. This isn't legal speak at all, but to my way of thinking, it seems a path of least resistance? Maybe it would be a good option for someone (and I'm not talking Rudy here as I don't for one moment believe him to be innocent) who doesn't have the funds for a long drawn-out trial or maybe someone who doesn't have the proverbial snowball's chance due to whatever reason. I don't think that answers your question at all, but those are the only reasons I can think of why someone innocent would opt for this.

Again, thanks for your welcome.

Fast track worked for Guede. He had a solid case against him and got 16 years. AK and RS had only a case built from mistakes and conjecture (I site the discussion of this forum as proof) and they got 26 years and spent a million dollars defending themselves. Fast track works and works well.

 

[Maya C]

I think that the "fast track" theme comes up regularly because there are those who try to give the impression that Guede has been treated with more leniency than the other two. These posters conveniently forget the "fast track" business. Hence discussions go on and on for ever. Witness the length of this thread.
I used to drop in occasionally for some intelligent discussion, but now that Fioana and Fulcanelli have gone, it hardly worthwhile.
Somebody told me that they are still discussing the staged break-in. I thought that the staging was well established and that even Knox supporters agree with this. Topics like this just keep going round and round.

Colonel,

Agreed, but I'm of the opinion that the English speaking (for lack of a more descriptive term, meaning in the US and abroad) media has been very sloppy in this case, possibly due to translation errors. I recall after Rudy's first appeal reading more than one news report that presented it much like Supernaut did so I can understand why he/she felt that way. Now whether the media misrepresentation was deliberate or an honest mistake, we may never know.

I haven't read any posts by either of the people you mention, but I must add that I am working from most recent back, for the simple reason I don't want to pull something out that was discussed and done with long ago. Ancora Imparo. The whole notion of a forum is new to me. I'm more of a real time/real world person so apologies to the forum if I seemingly behave like a cavewoman. Still unsure of proper net behavior.

 

[el buscador]

Fast track worked for Guede. He had a solid case against him and got 16 years. AK and RS had only a case built from mistakes and conjecture (I site the discussion of this forum as proof) and they got 26 years and spent a million dollars defending themselves. Fast track works and works well.

It would be nice to see some statistics about how the verdicts usually go in a fast track trial. I'm not quite sure how to look it up but I might give it a shot.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Hello Everyone,

I'm new here and reading up, though seeing this post by Supernaut, wanted to comment. Rudy's sentence was cut in half because he opted for the fast track trial, something neither Amanda nor Raffaele did. The sentence was cut in half upon appeal, which is likely what Biscotti hoped for and why he (some might say wisely) advised his client to go for the fast track. Note that had Amanda or Raffaele opted for the fast track trial, they too would have had their sentences reduced. I'm not saying I think it is right, but to imply Mignini et al gave Rudy a gift of appreciation is not factually correct.

Looking forward to being here, though by the amount of posts on a given day here, will have to spend much more time on the computer than I normally do!

Hello, Maya C
Welcome and thanks for clarifying the legal aspects.

In my opinion Rudy had an incentive to blame AK and RS regardless of any deals with the prosecution. As suspects they were much better targets to transfer his guilt and share involvement then some anonymous "Italian guy".

 

[Chris C]

Hi, Maya C, welcome to JREF.

My question would be, why would an innocent person want to do a fast track trial? From what I've read there are limitations to what can be brought up in a fast track trial.

Its a good defensive strategy on Rudy's side to do a fast track trial. Remember rudy is convicted of murder. However, the prosecution claims at his trial that he did the crime with Knox/Sollecito. So he does a fast track and his sentence will get cut in half on appeals. Knox and Sollecito have now been convicted. However, if Knox/Sollecito's appeal succeeds and their conviction gets overturned. Then the reasons for overturning Knox/Sollecito's conviction should directly affect Rudy's conviction.

 

[el buscador]

Its a good defensive strategy on Rudy's side to do a fast track trial. Remember rudy is convicted of murder. However, the prosecution claims at his trial that he did the crime with Knox/Sollecito. So he does a fast track and his sentence will get cut in half on appeals. Knox and Sollecito have now been convicted. However, if Knox/Sollecito's appeal succeeds and their conviction gets overturned. Then the reasons for overturning Knox/Sollecito's conviction should directly affect Rudy's conviction.

I believe it was a good stratgety, also, and a backhanded way for the prosecutors to "reward" rudy for his tidbits of "memory" about Amanda and Raffaele.

 

[colonelhall]

"Now that you mention it, the "staged break-in" theory was discussed recently and quite obliterated, TBH. It seems no one tries to defend it anymore."

I don't think so. I see some very amusing attempts at providing a theory regarding a break-in. However, I prefer to accept the evidence as presented. And no, I shall not be wading in, as this debate has gone on for months and months. I will go along with the accepted view that there was a break-in.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

fast track vs. leniency

I think that the "fast track" theme comes up regularly because there are those who try to give the impression that Guede has been treated with more leniency than the other two. These posters conveniently forget the "fast track" business. Hence discussions go on and on for ever. Witness the length of this thread.
I used to drop in occasionally for some intelligent discussion, but now that Fioana and Fulcanelli have gone, it hardly worthwhile.
Somebody told me that they are still discussing the staged break-in. I thought that the staging was well established and that even Knox supporters agree with this. Topics like this just keep going round and round.

colonelhall,

My understanding is that Guede received a reduction of 6 years from 30, and then received the 1/3-off benefit of the fast track trial. I have also read statements at Perugia-Shock which indicate that the prosecution chose not to appeal his sentence. I don't think that they could appeal the fast-track reduction, but they could have appealed the other reduction.

 

[Maya C]

I believe it was a good stratgety, also, and a backhanded way for the prosecutors to "reward" rudy for his tidbits of "memory" about Amanda and Raffaele.

The prosecutor/s do not reduce the sentence. Acquittal or conviction is by the Judge of the Prelimary Trial. In the fast track, the defendant has relinquished his right to presenting any new evidence. His "reward", if you would like to call it that, is that his sentence can be reduced by a third. The defendant and the prosecution may appeal the judgement.

 

[Amazer]

Hi colonelhall,

Now that you mention it, the "staged break-in" theory was discussed recently and quite obliterated, TBH. It seems no one tries to defend it anymore. You may step in if you wish, but it would be best to review the last few pages first. I'm sure you don't want to repeat already discredited arguments just to keep it going round and round

I think Fiona prefers sites where her views are not allowed to be challenged, while Fulcanelli is on a leave because he prefers insults more then arguments

Katody,,

The lack of defense of the 'staged' break in theory has more to do with the fact that we have gone through this before. It's boring to have to do it again and again, especially when you don't bring anything new and fresh. It's the same old wine in a new bottle.

Amazer

 

[Katody Matrass]

Katody,,

The lack of defense of the 'staged' break in theory has more to do with the fact that we have gone through this before. It's boring to have to do it again and again, especially when you don't bring anything new and fresh. It's the same old wine in a new bottle.

Amazer

I see, you mean we haven't seen the best arguments this time?

 

[Maya C]

Hello, Maya C
Welcome and thanks for clarifying the legal aspects.

In my opinion Rudy had an incentive to blame AK and RS regardless of any deals with the prosecution. As suspects they were much better targets to transfer his guilt and share involvement then some anonymous "Italian guy".

Hello Katody Matrass and thank you for your welcome.

What deal did Rudy make with the prosecution? I have not heard or read anything about this. Would you please elaborate?

I'm not sure that I see any incentive for Rudy to finger Amanda or Raffaele as we see what happened from Amanda fingering Patrick Lamumba. Had Amanda and Raffaele been acquitted in their trial, I believe there would be consequences for Rudy falsely accusing them. Perhaps if they have luck in winning their appeals, there may be. We'll soon see.

At any rate, the saddest thing here is that the three people convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher get so much more consideration than she or her family. I find that disturbing and a sad reflection on society as a whole. (Yes, I do include myself in that)

Again, thanks for your welcome.