Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Scorpion NITE]

So because he feels strongly about this and was willing to sacrifice his job his opinions have more weight than others?

Are you saying that you feel his opinions carry more weight than others?

I'm not sure that I would necessarily state that BUT I would definitely believe that the man has credibility.

After all, as he says.....''...25 years as a Special Agent and Supervisory Special Agent. My entire investigative experience was in the investigation and prosecution of violent crime, from murder to mass-murder and terrorism....''

That is not something to be dismissed lightly.

And I seriously doubt that it will be dismissed lightly.

By anyone with a modicum of intelligence.

 

[Draca]

Perhaps.

No, No...I mean...YES.

Most definitely.

I think.

You are both right.

LOL !

Draca is a she btw.

 

[Justinian2]

Who did all this? Does America have Italian spies?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8343123.stm

CIA agents guilty of Italy kidnap

Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr was snatched from a street in Milan
An Italian judge has convicted 23 Americans - all but one of them CIA agents - and two Italian secret agents for the 2003 kidnap of a Muslim cleric.

The agents were accused of abducting Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, known as Abu Omar, from Milan and sending him to Egypt, where he was allegedly tortured.

The trial, which began in June 2007, is the first involving the CIA's so-called "extraordinary rendition" programme.

The Obama administration has expressed its disappointment at the convictions.

"We are disappointed by the verdicts," state department spokesman Ian Kelly said in Washington.

He declined to comment further pending a written opinion from the judge, but said an appeal was likely.

Three Americans and five Italians were acquitted by the court in Milan.

The Americans were all tried in their absence as they have not been extradited from the US to Italy.

Could Italy be either imprisoning Amanda in retalliation for this incident or to setup a trade? Stranger things have happened.

However, Occam's razor suggests that the simplest explaination is correct. Therefore lab contamination and incompetence resulted in the convictions of AK and RS.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8343123.stm

Could Italy be either imprisoning Amanda in retalliation for this incident or to setup a trade? Stranger things have happened.

However, Occam's razor suggests that the simplest explaination is correct. Therefore lab contamination and incompetence resulted in the convictions of AK and RS.

No, it's not political retaliation, although it provides fodder for people with a political agenda.

The fundamental reason this happens is because the authorities make a public accusation, and from then on their reputation is at stake. Read about the case of Derek and Alex King down in Florida. They didn't kill their father - their pedophile abuser did. But the prosecutor down there risked turning the pedo loose on the community because he had publicly stated that the kids did the murder. I have mentioned the Kelly Michaels case many times. And the Nicarico case in Illinois. These people will do anything and everything to avoid having to admit they made a mistake.

 

[Kaosium]

Could Italy be either imprisoning Amanda in retalliation for this incident or to setup a trade? Stranger things have happened.

I don't think you should mistake an Italian Court with the Italian Government or for that matter the Italian people. Just because a judge wants to make a political statement doesn't mean the government (which had to approve of this operation on some level) wants to, or that the majority of the people even care. Imagine for example a prosecutor in New York indicting one side of the PLO/Israel conflict when in the US for a peace conference on a trifling charge for local political gain. The rest of the government privately might want that DA's head on a platter and aren't going to move a muscle to extradite anyone.

However, Occam's razor suggests that the simplest explaination is correct. Therefore lab contamination and incompetence resulted in the convictions of AK and RS.

I don't think it was that. I'm starting to wonder if the forensic data we take as gospel is really all that important in an Italian court. Remember how it was before the OJ trial? Most of us were introduced to that element of forensics during that circus. Before that it was fingerprints (which aren't always damning) and blood types, which didn't always identify someone perfectly, even if they were AB- there was still about a 1% chance it could be someone else. However we still convicted people every day for murder and other crimes. I suspect it might still be like that in some places in Italy where modern forensics are science fiction, and thus distrusted by the courts and juries.

I suspect the most damning thing Mignini did was seed the tabloids with all the stories of 'lies' and sleaze, which is a lot easier for the average person anywhere to digest than alleles and such.

 

[Kaosium]

Their Italian campus is in Florence. They can't come out and say, "we're afraid the authorities might retaliate for Steve Moore's activities by causing problems for our students and personnel." But that's the underlying concern.

Actually that's what I recalled reading, which struck me as bizarre. I looked it up and it wasn't actually a quote from a Pepperdine official, so it must have been information the reporter got on background.

 

[Mary_H]

.....However I'm getting the feeling that forensics doesn't matter as much in an Italian court, it's not as much whether they can prove anything but whether the defendants actions 'look guilty.' That's why I suspect the longer this goes on the worse it is going to end for everyone involved.

.....I don't think it was that. I'm starting to wonder if the forensic data we take as gospel is really all that important in an Italian court.....I suspect it might still be like that in some places in Italy where modern forensics are science fiction, and thus distrusted by the courts and juries.

I suspect the most damning thing Mignini did was seed the tabloids with all the stories of 'lies' and sleaze, which is a lot easier for the average person anywhere to digest than alleles and such.

I remember reading, way, way back, an explanation by an Italian poster (it actually may have been Yummi a/k/a Machiavelli, on Candace Dempsey's blog) that Italian courts are more about who can tell a better story than they are about evidence. Here is a small excerpt from Wikipedia on the subject of forensics:

The word forensic comes from the Latin adjective forensis, meaning "of or before the forum." In Roman times, a criminal charge meant presenting the case before a group of public individuals in the forum. Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based on their side of the story. The individual with the best argument and delivery would determine the outcome of the case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_science

One wonders how far Italian courtrooms have come from their roots.

It is distasteful for educated Americans to dig the dirt for tabloid fodder to use against their opponents, but I suppose that, in an emergency, we can be persuaded to rise above what is distasteful. Maybe it's not too late to start thinking in terms of skeletons lying in the closets of the Perugian magistrates. Mignini's preoccupation with les ménages à quatre might give us a place to start.

 

[Kaosium]

I remember reading, way, way back, an explanation by an Italian poster (it actually may have been Yummi a/k/a Machiavelli, on Candace Dempsey's blog) that Italian courts are more about who can tell a better story than they are about evidence. Here is a small excerpt from Wikipedia on the subject of forensics:

I think we read the same piece, though I don't think I read it the same place. I started with what I figured would be the 'neutral' sites, as I figured anything by someone from Seattle or an Amanda Knox supporter would be biased. It was quite a shock to find out the opposite was true.

One wonders how far Italian courtrooms have come from their roots.

Or just about anywhere for that matter. Growing up one of my favorite songs was Dylan's "Hurricane" and one line always stuck with me: "Couldn't help but make me feel ashamed, to live in a land where justice is a game."

It is distasteful for educated Americans to dig the dirt for tabloid fodder to use against their opponents, but I suppose that, in an emergency, we can be persuaded to rise above what is distasteful. Maybe it's not too late to start thinking in terms of skeletons lying in the closets of the Perugian magistrates. Mignini's preoccupation with les ménages à quatre might give us a place to start.

From what I've read of him, that man must have made some enemies, and I too would be really interested in just what sort of files he downloads onto his computer...

However I don't think you really need to tabloid him much, the truth on this guy is outrageous enough. Actually I want some benign stuff too, I like to paint an entire picture of someone and there's just not much besides 'slavering mad prosecutor with satanic orgy fetish' out there on him.

He supposedly thinks in Latin, that's kinda cool.

 

[quadraginta]

I remember reading, way, way back, an explanation by an Italian poster (it actually may have been Yummi a/k/a Machiavelli, on Candace Dempsey's blog) that Italian courts are more about who can tell a better story than they are about evidence. Here is a small excerpt from Wikipedia on the subject of forensics:

One wonders how far Italian courtrooms have come from their roots.

You say this as if you are suggesting that other courts (presumably such as in the U.S. or U.K.) are significantly different in this regard. I don't believe that reality supports such as suggestion.

It is more than merely a truism that the best lawyers and biggest bank accounts get a defendant the best chances of walking away scot-free in the U.S. ... all the justice they can afford. Lawyers in our system are still high priced story tellers, the best ones usually getting paid the most, and it is the quality of the story which still often decides the cases as much as any barrage of physical evidence. Since argument by anecdote is so popular in these threads I'll just offer O.J. as an example.

What aspects of this phenomenon are you suggesting are unique to Italy?

It is distasteful for educated Americans to dig the dirt for tabloid fodder to use against their opponents, but I suppose that, in an emergency, we can be persuaded to rise above what is distasteful. Maybe it's not too late to start thinking in terms of skeletons lying in the closets of the Perugian magistrates. Mignini's preoccupation with les ménages à quatre might give us a place to start.

Is this a more verbose phrasing of the old, "Well ... I don't like to gossip, but ..." disclaimer?

I think that one thing any of us should have been able to glean from these threads is that the title and position of "prosecutor" is not one which is very analogous between the Italian and American systems. In short, Mignini personally would seem to have had much less independence and control over the investigation and court proceedings than an American prosecutor, due in no small degree to the fact that the court proceeding are actually part of the investigation, and thus under quite a bit more direction from senior judges than would be true here, where the judge's role is restricted solely to a determination of propriety after the investigation, and relatively constrained even in that regard.

Tabloid style character assassination of Mignini as an individual based on imagined, alleged, or even real transgressions only marginally (if at all) related to this case would be even less meaningful in Italy than they would be here. And it wouldn't often mean a great deal here.

 

[Mary_H]

You say this as if you are suggesting that other courts (presumably such as in the U.S. or U.K.) are significantly different in this regard. I don't believe that reality supports such as suggestion.

It is more than merely a truism that the best lawyers and biggest bank accounts get a defendant the best chances of walking away scot-free in the U.S. ... all the justice they can afford. Lawyers in our system are still high priced story tellers, the best ones usually getting paid the most, and it is the quality of the story which still often decides the cases as much as any barrage of physical evidence. Since argument by anecdote is so popular in these threads I'll just offer O.J. as an example.

I am sure that is often true once a case gets into court, but it's irrelevant, because this case would not have gotten into court in the United States.

What aspects of this phenomenon are you suggesting are unique to Italy?

Italy is unique in its 3-trial system. According to your characterization above, a "Giuliano Bongiorno" would not have lost the case in the United States.

I think that one thing any of us should have been able to glean from these threads is that the title and position of "prosecutor" is not one which is very analogous between the Italian and American systems. In short, Mignini personally would seem to have had much less independence and control over the investigation and court proceedings than an American prosecutor, due in no small degree to the fact that the court proceeding are actually part of the investigation, and thus under quite a bit more direction from senior judges than would be true here, where the judge's role is restricted solely to a determination of propriety after the investigation, and relatively constrained even in that regard.

To whom did Mignini answer as he directed the investigation?

Tabloid style character assassination of Mignini as an individual based on imagined, alleged, or even real transgressions only marginally (if at all) related to this case would be even less meaningful in Italy than they would be here. And it wouldn't often mean a great deal here.

It would mean nothing here. I find it hard to believe it would mean less in Italy, though, given the way the press is part and parcel of the legal system.

 

[Chris C]

I believe one of the reasons for the late collection of the bra clasp, the purse, and I believe some of MK's clothing was because ILE had to coordinate with the defense team, who dragged their feet (we agree that a defense team, actually two, did exist by November 6th?).

Actually I believe the reason for the late collection of the bra clasp has more to do with incompetence. If I remember correctly they numbered and took a picture of it. Then forgot to collect it.

 

[Chris C]

A person with a felony or misdemeanor conviction can get a United States passport as long as they have completed their sentence and is not on probation or parole.

What Amanda received was a violation.

Exactly. Doesn't each country require a record of criminal convictions when apply for a student visa. Heck you can't even go to canada if you have a DUI.

 

[Chris C]

No offense, but that law school is second-tier, at best. (The 'White Shoe' Wall Street firms won't exactly be knocking down his door.)

You'll note also that his paper has not been published - not even in a bottom-tier review.

Finally, you'd do well to remember that this paper was not only written by a student, but a student at a COMMON LAW school with no formal training in the Italian Civil Law tradition. He is quite literally in no position to fully understand and appreciate Italian rules, rationales and procedures, much less place them in the appropriate context. (Hence the status of his student paper: UNPUBLISHED.)

What do you consider Top Tier law schools? Whats the difference between someone with a top tier school degree and botom tier school degree? MONEY.
Im guessing you still have to pass state bar exams.

 

[Justinian2]

No, it's not political retaliation, although it provides fodder for people with a political agenda.

The fundamental reason this happens is because the authorities make a public accusation, and from then on their reputation is at stake. Read about the case of Derek and Alex King down in Florida. They didn't kill their father - their pedophile abuser did. But the prosecutor down there risked turning the pedo loose on the community because he had publicly stated that the kids did the murder. I have mentioned the Kelly Michaels case many times. And the Nicarico case in Illinois. These people will do anything and everything to avoid having to admit they made a mistake.

The same motive is behind many of the internet responses I see, including or perhaps especially the nasty responses. That's why I get so mad. It's only another's pride one has to overcome and the argument is over. I've had internet and family discussions go on for years because people were afraid they were wrong.

People should take pride in their ability to admit that they have been wrong; few are sent to jail for admitting they were wrong. I respect those people.

 

[Justinian2]

I don't think you should mistake an Italian Court with the Italian Government or for that matter the Italian people. Just because a judge wants to make a political statement doesn't mean the government (which had to approve of this operation on some level) wants to, or that the majority of the people even care. Imagine for example a prosecutor in New York indicting one side of the PLO/Israel conflict when in the US for a peace conference on a trifling charge for local political gain. The rest of the government privately might want that DA's head on a platter and aren't going to move a muscle to extradite anyone.

I don't think it was that. I'm starting to wonder if the forensic data we take as gospel is really all that important in an Italian court. Remember how it was before the OJ trial? Most of us were introduced to that element of forensics during that circus. Before that it was fingerprints (which aren't always damning) and blood types, which didn't always identify someone perfectly, even if they were AB- there was still about a 1% chance it could be someone else. However we still convicted people every day for murder and other crimes. I suspect it might still be like that in some places in Italy where modern forensics are science fiction, and thus distrusted by the courts and juries.

I suspect the most damning thing Mignini did was seed the tabloids with all the stories of 'lies' and sleaze, which is a lot easier for the average person anywhere to digest than alleles and such.

Groups can be bad too. Doesn't mean that the group is always that bad in every way. Nazi's probably weren't ALL bad. Every Nazi wasn't bad in every way.

Even 'racism' isn't completely bad as the 'politically correct' would have us believe. For example, the Sickle Cell Anemia condition wouldn't even be treated if we didn't associate the condition with a race. We've got to form associations in order to learn. However, word associations aren't the end all of learning.

I do blame the Italian government. The problematic people in their courts and police wouldn't be causing problems if more took the responsibility to implement a systematic method of addressing these problem people before they collect into a group big enough to do damage. Groups are a problem. Nazis were a problem. Groups had a leader. Nazis had Hitler.

There is a leader behind the convictions of AK and RS.

 

[quadraginta]

I am sure that is often true once a case gets into court. However, this case would not have gotten into court in the United States.

You've been posting in these threads for quite a while. I find it hard to believe that you you have overlooked entirely the veritable blizzard of examples, mostly from the U.S., which have been offered to demonstrate that these sorts of cases often do and have made it into court here.

Especially since they have, almost without exception, been offered specifically as evidence (in the mistaken idea that anecdote is the equivalent of evidence) that the Knox trial must be fundamentally flawed.

I don't need to offer examples to demonstrate your error here, your own fellow Knox advocates have been doing it almost from the very beginning of these threads.

<snip>

It would mean nothing here. I find it hard to believe it would mean less in Italy, though, given the way the press is part and parcel of the legal system.

This is another topic which has been discussed in depth here. To deny the weight of press influence on public opinion and trial execution in the U.S. requires either a profound ignorance of American history or a willful denial. We have always had a "Crime of the Century" on a yearly or even monthly basis, at least as far back as the telegraph existed.

In recent years this trend has done nothing but accelerate. A lot. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that our various media outlets now devote more of their combined budgets to in-detail pursuit of crimes and trials, before, during, and after, than is spent in Italy on all communications of any sort, including gossip over the telephone. Once respectable in-depth news reviews are becoming little more than "true crime" magazines in dismaying numbers.

Italy may try hard, but they can only be rank amateurs and wannabes when compared to the American appetite for salacious crime stories and the catering to it by American media.

Just by way of example (Remember, argument by anecdote is evidence.) we have one nightly national "news" program, one hour long every weekday, repeated every other hour throughout the night, and rebroadcast worldwide which devoted virtually all of its airtime for nearly an entire year on nothing but the Caylee Anthony disappearance and murder. Her mother, Casey Anthony, has been in jail since the summer of 2008, and won't go to trial until the summer of next year at the earliest.

We still get regular reports on nearly every move she makes. Including how much she spends at the jail commissary and which brands of hair care products and snacks she likes.

Let's hear from Halides1 about his opinion of Nancy Grace, and about the effects of American media on American criminal proceedings. Maybe he'd like to discuss some lacrosse players as an example.

We already know far more about the Anthony case than we could ever hope to learn about Knox/Sollecito. Florida law mandates that every single document relating to the case become a matter of public record with only a couple of stringently controlled exceptions, and as soon as that documentation is released our media ensures it is available to anyone who bothers to spend five minutes on-line.

Do you think a better example can be found of press entanglement with the legal system than a state law which mandates almost immediate press access to every single detail of a case?

Do you think Anthony is guilty? Do you think she should be convicted on the evidence available. It's nearly all already public. Do you think she will be convicted? Is there "reasonable doubt"?

The sort of approaches employed here to persuade people of the injustice of Knox's arrest could even more easily be applied to the Anthony case. Beyond her demeanor and contradictory or misleading statements there is, to borrow a worn out refrain, "no evidence" of her complicity. No direct physical evidence which cannot be explained away in some other fashion.

And yet, there she is, sitting in jail for over two years ... so far ... just waiting for a chance in court, and if she so much as buys a bag of Cheetos the Grace creature or young Ms. JVM will ensure that the entire nation (and any other part of the world that wants to) knows about it within the week, if not sooner.

What about the Peterson triplets ... Scott, Drew, and Michael? How conclusive is the physical evidence in those cases. What part has the media played?

Jeffrey MacDonald found himself in a second trial after having been found innocent by the first one because his father-in-law didn't like his demeanor on TV after he went free. What part of that second-bite-at-the-apple conviction do you think the press may have played. Charlie Wilkes thinks MacDonald is guilty. So would anyone who read Fatal Vision. If they were to read Fatal Justice instead, maybe not so much.

Do you really think that the Italian press could ever hope to equal our sort of obsessive scrutiny and saturation? I don't think they could even afford it if they wanted to. The American appetite for gruesome and salacious gossip is the match of any culture in the world, and we're willing to pay to assuage that hunger. The wealthiest society in the world putting its money where its mind is. What hope could little, bitty Italy have of surpassing that?

 

[Dan O.]

Actually I believe the reason for the late collection of the bra clasp has more to do with incompetence. If I remember correctly they numbered and took a picture of it. Then forgot to collect it.

I don't recall there being a number in the photograph. There was an explanation that the clasp was not assigned it's own evidence number because it was part of the bra that already had a number.

There is a lot of strangeness surrounding the bra clasp. The first photo of the clasp clearly shows that the clasp was in a location where it could not have been for the previous night. Perhaps the clasp moved when the pillow was lifted and the clasp discovered. Alternatively one of the investigators picked up the clasp and then put it down again to stage the discovery photo as we've seen repeated in this case including with the bra clasp in it's rediscovery in December.

Between the initial discovery and later recovery, the front door to the cottage was photographed being wide open and the seal (which apparentely consists of plain paper and packing tape) had visibly been pealed down from one corner. Yet we see in the Massei Report the claim that there was no entry and the seal was intact.

 

[Machiavelli]

And I think the issue is that Steve Moore is using his experience in investigating hundreds of cases and applying logic to look at this case. Very few people seem to be doing that. How are you being realistic and he isn't?

His experience on what? What does he know of this terrain? A serious person won't start making conclusion about a case without having even read the process files. In addition he doesn't know the police, the prosecutor and judges in charge, the procedures, the law and legal context, he doesn't now the language and is not able to understand documents, he doesn't even know basic facts of the investigation and trial.

 

[Machiavelli]

Thanks. How would you rate your objectivity in creating this scale? How do you know you are not just reading into these images the results you want from the outset? What makes it 90% 10% as opposed to 70/30?

My ratio 90-10 is subjective. What makes it 90-10 is my arbitrary choice, because a ratio 90-10 is merely a figure that I assume as cautional value. In fact looking at my pictures I feel certain more like 99% and beyond, but I cannot "prove" it definitely so I decide to set a 10% doubt as a cautional value in favour of the defendants.

On this point you are willing to consider probability. It seems to me that you cannot limit it to just this one point. For example, although you discredit the source, Steve Moore has pointed out how very unlikely it is that a woman would use a knife to commit a murder. Will you allow yourself to consider this in evaluating guilt?

No. Because it is not true. This is a false probability.
I can access with my memory to a list of women who committed crimes using knifes in Italy. Numerically speaking, women rarely commit violent crimes in comparison to men, they do sometimes though.
Moreover, I am not accusing Amanda of having used a knife to kill somebody. I am accusing Amanda of being responsible in the death of Meredith Kercher. Maybe she was not in the room when the final blow was given, maybe she was not bearing a knife.

Although I can’t define it with a numerical score, statistically, the likelihood that Knox/Sollecito could commit the murder without leaving a trace in the victim’s room, beyond the much disputed bra clasp, is extraordinarily low. Are you saying otherwise, or are you saying that when you consider the bathmat, probability is the key determinate, but when you consider the murder room, the probability is not a factor in your reasoning. If so, why?

I consider likelyihood on every aspect. But the pieces of evidence indicating guilt are massive beyond a critical level. Single probabilistic elements in the other direction are not going to change it, once that the evidence is leading to a conclusion of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Mary_H]

You've been posting in these threads for quite a while. I find it hard to believe that you you have overlooked entirely the veritable blizzard of examples, mostly from the U.S., which have been offered to demonstrate that these sorts of cases often do and have made it into court here.

Many bad cases make it into the U.S. courts and many innocent people make it into U.S. jails, but I am speaking about this case very specifically. The very things that put Amanda and Raffaele into jail in Italy are the things that would have kept them out in the U.S. -- being perceived as attractive and privileged. You yourself made the claim that money buys freedom in the U.S. It also delays suspicion.

There is no doubt that U.S. police jail people before evidence is found, and that U.S. forensics labs falsify evidence, but they can get away with it more easily in cases where the detainees are indigent. Do you think the Seattle police would have been able to get away with jailing a doctor's son on no evidence, without giving him a phone call or an attorney? How about a lovely young girl from a good family? They wouldn't, because in the Seattle system, there isn't one single guy, who everybody else is afraid to defy, in charge of the whole investigation.

However, when they do get an innocent, indigent person with no advocates in their custody, then yes, the same process that seems to have happened in Perugia will happen here -- staff just "going along" and doing their jobs.

Now before all the inevitable responses that I have just proven that the only reason the innocentisti are defending Amanda and Raffaele is because they are white, rich and spoiled, let me state my position.

Prejudice is prejudice. In some places, you are hated for being black; in some places you are hated for being rich; in some places you are hated for being a woman; in some places you are hated for being from another country. Given the opportunity, hate and resentment will find ways to express themselves in the people who suffer from them.

I don't defend Amanda and Raffaele because I see them as "good kids" who couldn't possibly commit the crime; I defend them because they are innocent. The prosecutor had no evidence that showed they were involved. Period.

Especially since they have, almost without exception, been offered specifically as evidence (in the mistaken idea that anecdote is the equivalent of evidence) that the Knox trial must be fundamentally flawed.

I don't need to offer examples to demonstrate your error here, your own fellow Knox advocates have been doing it almost from the very beginning of these threads.

They aren't anecdotes, they are analogies. Analogies are extremely important tools for reasoning -- that's why they have such a gigantic section of them in the SAT's for college-bound students. The person(s) who wrote the Wiki entry on analogy cited Douglas Hofstadter for saying that analogy "is the core of cognition."

The only reason anyone closes his mind to analogies on these pages or tries to diminish them by calling them anecdotes is that he does not want to be dissuaded from his beliefs in guilt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

This is another topic which has been discussed in depth here. To deny the weight of press influence on public opinion and trial execution in the U.S. requires either a profound ignorance of American history or a willful denial. We have always had a "Crime of the Century" on a yearly or even monthly basis, at least as far back as the telegraph existed.

In recent years this trend has done nothing but accelerate. A lot. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that our various media outlets now devote more of their combined budgets to in-detail pursuit of crimes and trials, before, during, and after, than is spent in Italy on all communications of any sort, including gossip over the telephone. Once respectable in-depth news reviews are becoming little more than "true crime" magazines in dismaying numbers.

Italy may try hard, but they can only be rank amateurs and wannabes when compared to the American appetite for salacious crime stories and the catering to it by American media.

<snip>

Do you really think that the Italian press could ever hope to equal our sort of obsessive scrutiny and saturation? I don't think they could even afford it if they wanted to. The American appetite for gruesome and salacious gossip is the match of any culture in the world, and we're willing to pay to assuage that hunger. The wealthiest society in the world putting its money where its mind is. What hope could little, bitty Italy have of surpassing that?

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you have written about American media. My comment, "It would mean nothing here. I find it hard to believe it would mean less in Italy, though, given the way the press is part and parcel of the legal system," was intended to be aimed specifically at Mignini.