Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[quadraginta]

I'm guessing that your cheap sarcasm is aimed at Machiavelli rather than Mary_H, since it was Machiavelli who made the ludicrous statement that Sollecito Senior had the "capability of move (sic) a network at his disposal".

You're guessing wrong.

I wasn't aiming at anyone in particular. A moment of ironic humor is not always cheap sarcasm, although I may have to defer to your demonstrated expertise in that field. Every post in these threads is not necessarily a personal attack, and your services as Unsolicited Champion are not always required.

They are often entertaining, though, so please don't stop on my account.

 

[Alt+F4]

So then all the "Internet diagnosis" done by the guilters or those that have never met Amanda should also be labeled as a JOKE.

Yes, they should be as well. Read Justianian2's posts regarding Amanda and this case; they go beyond an "Internet diagnosis". They are creepy, disturbing and out of line whether one believes Amanda is guilty or not.

 

[LondonJohn]

You're guessing wrong.

I wasn't aiming at anyone in particular. A moment of ironic humor is not always cheap sarcasm, although I may have to defer to your demonstrated expertise in that field. Every post in these threads is not necessarily a personal attack, and your services as Unsolicited Champion are not always required.

They are often entertaining, though, so please don't stop on my account.

No. Your post was designed to lampoon people whom you consider to be "conspiracy theorists". If you prefer to assert that it was just a bit of general irony aimed at no person or group in particular, then go right ahead and assert just that.

BTW seeing as I'm (according to you) the Unsolicited Champion of cheap sarcasm, I'd be delighted if you could point me towards those posts of mine which earned me this honour. Because I can't find them very easily.....

 

[Machiavelli]

Aaaaand...you're factually incorrect. You're obviously not familiar with travelling within the European Union. A passport or driver's licence is most definitely needed for travel between EU countries: the "Schengen" Agreement abolished internal border controls, but every person crossing from one EU member state to another has to produce identification. Knox would not have been able to cross the border from Italy to any other EU member state without producing her passport or an international drivers' licence.

And in any case, all new applications for passports would be centrally checked against a database, so - for example - the US Embassy in Paris doesn't just issue a replacement passport off its own bat - it has to be centrally checked and ratified. Therefore, if there was a stop on passport re-issuance to her, that would apply to any US Embassy worldwide.

So, to borrow a phrase from Machiavelli: you don't know what you're talking about.

LondonJohn, I don't want to be blunt, but I'm afraid you may be confusing the Schengen praxis with a UK-Schengen crossing (where instead you often are requested to produce identification document); nobody ever asks me a document whenever I travel to Germany, Austria, Switzerland and France. Even entering Hungary and Finland nobody asked me anything. In fact there was nobody at the border, there are no guards and tolls between states.

 

[LondonJohn]

Yes, they should be as well. Read Justianian2's posts regarding Amanda and this case; they go beyond an "Internet diagnosis". They are creepy, disturbing and out of line whether one believes Amanda is guilty or not.

Some of the more extreme posts of Justinian's are beyond my limits too (but I wouldn't go nearly so far as to ascribe the same adjectives as you have done). However, his opinions are easily matched by those who think that a diagnosis of NPD/sociopathy/psychopathy can be made with regard to Amanda Knox on the basis of some media depictions of her personality and some of her writings. Now that's creepy and disturbing and out of line.

 

[LondonJohn]

LondonJohn, I don't want to be blunt, but I'm afraid you may be confusing the Schengen praxis with a UK-Schengen crossing (where instead you often are requested to produce identification document); nobody ever asks me a document whenever I travel to Germany, Austria, Switzerland and France. Even entering Hungary and Finland nobody asked me anything. In fact there was nobody at the border, there are no guards and tolls between states.

I definitely had my passport checked last week within the EU. And, in any case, if Knox had tried to flee Switzerland to another EU country, she'd have had to find a mode of transportation which would have required identification as some part.

In any case, the whole subject is moot, because she most assuredly would have needed to get a passport to return to the USA. And no US Embassy or Consulate within the EU would have issued a replacement to her if her original had been impounded by the court. And that's really what we're arguing about. Knox and Sollecito clearly didn't meet the very exceptional criteria for imprisonment before charges or trial, and they should not have been incarcerated. Otherwise, I'm certain that the relevant codes would simply say that anyone suspected of murder should automatically be imprisoned while awaiting charges and trial. The rules are very clear and specific on what the exceptional reasons for imprisonment in these circumstances are.

 

[Machiavelli]

Why did Dr. Sollecito not move the network that was at his disposal to get Raffaele out of prison?

He did move the network. In fact he is now indicted together with other 4 members of his family and other people.

2008
http://www.crimeblog.it/post/891/delitto-di-perugia-i-genitori-di-sollecito-indagati-cercavano-pressioni-politiche-per-fermare-le-indagini

http://www.repubblica.it/2008/04/sezioni/cronaca/perugia-uccisa7/genitori-sollecito/genitori-sollecito.html

2009
http://http://wildgreta.blogspot.com/2009/04/il-corpo-di-meredith-su-telenorba.html

2010
http://www.umbriajournal.com/MEDIACENTER/FE//media/meredith-slitta-ludienza-per-5-familiari-di-sollec.html

http://forum.gamesvillage.it/showthread.php?657176-Il-Piano-della-Famiglia-Sollecito-per-Salvare-il-Figlio

http://www.umbrialeft.it/node/29532

 

[LondonJohn]

He did move the network. In fact he is now indicted together with other 4 members of his family and other people.

2008
http://www.crimeblog.it/post/891/delitto-di-perugia-i-genitori-di-sollecito-indagati-cercavano-pressioni-politiche-per-fermare-le-indagini

http://www.repubblica.it/2008/04/sezioni/cronaca/perugia-uccisa7/genitori-sollecito/genitori-sollecito.html

2009
http://http://wildgreta.blogspot.com/2009/04/il-corpo-di-meredith-su-telenorba.html

2010
http://www.umbriajournal.com/MEDIACENTER/FE//media/meredith-slitta-ludienza-per-5-familiari-di-sollec.html

http://forum.gamesvillage.it/showthread.php?657176-Il-Piano-della-Famiglia-Sollecito-per-Salvare-il-Figlio

http://www.umbrialeft.it/node/29532

Where's this "network at his disposal"? These were actions by the immediate Sollecito family, who unwisely suggested contacting politicians who they knew to try to influence the trial (and the whole Telenorbia video release issue). And it would be extremely interesting to know under what powers the police tapped all the various telephones in order to obtain this information in the first place. What prima facie evidence did the police or prosecutors have that members of the Sollecito family were committing serious offences in order to get these phone taps authorised in the first place? Or is it just another example of Mignini and his Amazing Unauthorised Wiretaps?

 

[LondonJohn]

Hmmm I see that Michelle Moore is the latest person to get nastily examined by the more extreme members of PMF. I guess the reason why Michelle Moore didn't feel the need to secure all her previous internet postings and disguise her online presence is that she didn't think she would get stalked by a bunch of weird and offensive strangers who never even knew Meredith Kercher but who feel that they somehow "represent" her. Go figure.

 

[Kaosium]

Where's this "network at his disposal"? These were actions by the immediate Sollecito family, who unwisely suggested contacting politicians who they knew to try to influence the trial (and the whole Telenorbia video release issue). And it would be extremely interesting to know under what powers the police tapped all the various telephones in order to obtain this information in the first place. What prima facie evidence did the police or prosecutors have that members of the Sollecito family were committing serious offences in order to get these phone taps authorised in the first place? Or is it just another example of Mignini and his Amazing Unauthorised Wiretaps?

If my son was arrested for murder, and my daughter who was a cop thought he was a victim of a gross injustice I know I'd feel no fear contacting my elected officials and ask that they look into it. Would you feel any fear contacting your MP?

This is illegal in Italy?

 

[Machiavelli]

I definitely had my passport checked last week within the EU. And, in any case, if Knox had tried to flee Switzerland to another EU country, she'd have had to find a mode of transportation which would have required identification as some part.

In any case, the whole subject is moot, because she most assuredly would have needed to get a passport to return to the USA. And no US Embassy or Consulate within the EU would have issued a replacement to her if her original had been impounded by the court. And that's really what we're arguing about. Knox and Sollecito clearly didn't meet the very exceptional criteria for imprisonment before charges or trial, and they should not have been incarcerated. Otherwise, I'm certain that the relevant codes would simply say that anyone suspected of murder should automatically be imprisoned while awaiting charges and trial. The rules are very clear and specific on what the exceptional reasons for imprisonment in these circumstances are.

The precautional custody for suspet murderers is not exceptional at all.
Not only this: a rather recent law specifies that on charges of sexual violence a decree for precautional custody is mandatory, as the judges' first decision.

The specified parameters for articles 576-579 (murder) in the Penal Code:


competenza: Trib. collegiale; Corte d'Assise (prima parte del 2° comma)

arresto: facoltativo (1° comma); obbligatorio (2° comma)

fermo: consentito

custodia cautelare in carcere: consentita

altre misure cautelari personali: consentite

procedibilità: d'ufficio


Whenever is the case of "paragraph 2" ("2° comma" = a remand to a series of aggravating circumstances enlisted in art 61) arrest is compulsory as the first prosecutor's action just on indictment byt the Penal Code (which means, decree of arrest in case of serious elements of evidence, decree which occurs even before assessing the conditions for the precautional custody as they are set in the Procedure Code).

Sabrina Misseri and Robarto Spaccino are in precautional custody. People suspected of gruesome murders usually are in precautional ustody.

 

[Chris C]

Wrong. 100% wrong. (as before).

PS I went to Germany on business last week (from the UK), and I hired a car and drove to Paris to see a friend and flew back from there. My passport was inspected and swiped every time I crossed a national border (UK-Germany, Germany-France, France-UK), usually by the country I was about to enter. And I have been skiing in Switzerland by flying into Milan and driving over the border into Switzerland, and I can categorically assure everyone that my passport was required at the Italian-Swiss border.

Last time I went from Germany to Switzerland I dont remember them swiping my passport. Though it has been 18 years since I made that trip. However, I have never been able to enter or leave any country in europe to a destination outside of Europe without being able to produce a passport. Its also impossible to enter the United States without producing a passport if flying from somewhere other than Mexico or Canada. Said passport has to be shown before you can even get a ticket to this country and upon your arrival you must once again show your passport. Trust me I know, I have to get a new visa or stamp filler quite often due to the fact that I fly overseas once a month. I have been doing this for a long time since I work with companies like Exxon, BP, Chevron....

 

[quadraginta]

No. Your post was designed to lampoon people whom you consider to be "conspiracy theorists". If you prefer to assert that it was just a bit of general irony aimed at no person or group in particular, then go right ahead and assert just that.

It is quite true that my post was intended as a lampoon. Since neither Mary_H nor Machiavelli fall into the classification of "conspiracy theorists" in my opinion your allegation of "aiming" is itself mis-aimed.

I do indeed assert that it was general irony, and I think that the prior exchanges substantiate such an assertion. Even Halides1's contribution continued in the same vein, so I am not alone in such a perception. Unless, of course, your incisive deconstruction of his post is still pending, in which case I shall await further enlightenment with bated breath.

BTW seeing as I'm (according to you) the Unsolicited Champion of cheap sarcasm, I'd be delighted if you could point me towards those posts of mine which earned me this honour. Because I can't find them very easily.....

You seem to have conflated two separate sentences in my post. Perhaps you should re-read it in pursuit of improved comprehension. I was both conceding your unquestionable expertise concerning the topic of cheap sarcasm and pointing out that the unsolicited services of your Shining Armor are not required in every instance.

 

[Machiavelli]

Where's this "network at his disposal"? These were actions by the immediate Sollecito family, who unwisely suggested contacting politicians who they knew to try to influence the trial (and the whole Telenorbia video release issue). (...)

But Telenorba executives are also indicted. It's not normal for a tv network to comply and publish this material, to produce and to broadcast news reports like they did. It is not normal for a man in Bari to speak on the phone asking for governemtal powers to "flay" the chief of Perugia Flying squad. It is not comon for an average citizen to have a pillar of Bari masonry as prof. Introna and Giulia Bongiorno on his payroll.

 

[LondonJohn]

But Telenorba executives are also indicted. It's not normal for a tv network to comply and publish this material, to produce and to broadcast news reports like they did. It is not normal for a man in Bari to speak on the phone asking for governemtal powers to "flay" the chief of Perugia Flying squad. It is not comon for an average citizen to have a pillar of Bari masonry as prof. Introna and Giulia Bongiorno on his payroll.

You're suggesting that Sollecito Senior (or his "network") had some sort of power over Telenorba, to somehow persuade them to broadcast material that they would otherwise not have unilaterally chosen to broadcast?

And, I repeat, who authorised the wiretaps under which most of this evidence was gathered in the first place?

 

[Chris C]

Yes, they should be as well. Read Justianian2's posts regarding Amanda and this case; they go beyond an "Internet diagnosis". They are creepy, disturbing and out of line whether one believes Amanda is guilty or not.

I will agree some of the things people have said here is creepy and disturbing, and its not limited to just one poster on the Knox supporter side. Its also not just limited to this site.

 

[Machiavelli]

I definitely had my passport checked last week within the EU. And, in any case, if Knox had tried to flee Switzerland to another EU country, she'd have had to find a mode of transportation which would have required identification as some part.

(..)

Maybe OT - I am wondering: could this be due to exceptional security in the context of the last weeks of political demonstrations in France?

 

[platonov]

Where's this "network at his disposal"? These were actions by the immediate Sollecito family, who unwisely suggested contacting politicians who they knew to try to influence the trial (and the whole Telenorbia video release issue). And it would be extremely interesting to know under what powers the police tapped all the various telephones in order to obtain this information in the first place. What prima facie evidence did the police or prosecutors have that members of the Sollecito family were committing serious offences in order to get these phone taps authorised in the first place? Or is it just another example of Mignini and his Amazing Unauthorised Wiretaps?

So your argument is that when the 'ILE' operating in the 'most corrupt state ever' manage to foil a bid to 'pervert the course of justice' in a murder case and produce wiretap evidence leading to criminal charges ....... something , something. What is it again ?

Are all police/judicial actions directed against the perpetrators (or their associates) in the Kercher murder case suspect by their very nature.
This is a form of 'skepticism' I'm not familiar with (outside of this thread at any rate).

As it happens I have no idea of what codes or procedures were applied in this regard. But I put that down to my lack of knowledge of/access to all the relevant data. I certainly don't suspect malfeasance based my ignorance of the particulars or my unhappiness with the outcome.

.

 

[Machiavelli]

You're suggesting that Sollecito Senior (or his "network") had some sort of power over Telenorba, to somehow persuade them to broadcast material that they would otherwise not have unilaterally chosen to broadcast?

Exactly. It's obvious he had an influence on Telenorba. And they did not just chose to boadcast material, their juorunalists produced information broadcasts designed for the pourposes of family's defence lawyers.

And, I repeat, who authorised the wiretaps under which most of this evidence was gathered in the first place?

I don't know (it must be a judge from the GIP office anyway).

 

[tsig]

So then all the "Internet diagnosis" done by the guilters or those that have never met Amanda should also be labeled as a JOKE.

Sure. As far as I know Amanda wasn't found guilty due to internet diagnosis.