Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[treehorn]

From Candace Dempsey's most recent blog entry:
Quote:
The question: Was Knox ever considered innocent until proven guilty? Well, as an Italian reporter told me after the 2009 verdict in Perugia, Italy:

"Presumption of innocence is a new thing for us. We don't really get it yet.

A "reporter" did not "get" the right to be presumed innocent.

A reporter.

Not a judge, or a lawyer, but a reporter. An anonymous reporter, no less! LOL

How is that an 'indictment' of the entire system?!

Some dunce who never went to law school is standing on the courthouse steps and he/she is 'interviewed' for his/her opinion on the capacity of the judiciary to grapple with constitutional law?!

Looks to me like someone never went to journalism school either.

Get back to us when they figure out that what they needed here was an interview with a well-regarded con law professor or two.

 

[Dan O.]

This is why I think lie detector tests should be given to all involved in the interrogation. Otherwise ther is no accountability. After all it was them that failed to record the interrogation.

I think if that were to happen they would give the polygraph tests to themselves and then give themselves medals for being so brave and honest.


Before we get into a discussion of polygraph testing here, I think you should browse some of the other threads on this forum that specifically address the topic. 1 2 3 (and many more)

 

[Malkmus]

A "reporter" did not "get" the right to be presumed innocent.

A reporter.

Not a judge, or a lawyer, but a reporter. An anonymous reporter, no less! LOL

How is that an 'indictment' of the entire system?!

Some dunce who never went to law school is standing on the courthouse steps and he/she is 'interviewed' for his/her opinion on the capacity of the judiciary to grapple with constitutional law?!

Looks to me like someone never went to journalism school either.

Get back to us when they figure ou.../features/2008/06/perugia200806?currentPage=6

 

[Dan O.]

A "reporter" did not "get" the right to be presumed innocent.

Perhaps you did not get the the meaning of the reporters use of the word "get".

In the context, "us" and "we" are obviously referring to all italians and the "get" is used to imply acquisition (or lack thereof) of the right.

What the reporter is saying is that presumption of innocence has been written into the law but it's application has not trickled down to the people who are brought to court.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

presumption of innocence versus the supremacy of the prosecution

To all,

Judy Bachrach wrote, “The Italian legal system, ecclesiastical judge Count Neri Capponi informs me, will not work in Amanda’s favor. ‘Our system stems from the Inquisition and also from medieval law,’ he explains. What this means, in effect, he says, is that justice in Italy ‘is based on the supremacy of the prosecution. This nullifies the fact—written in our constitution by the way—that you’re innocent until proven guilty.’”

 

[ElsieEthrington]

My point is that Sollecito, like Knox, had a 'brush with the law'/ engaged in antisocial conduct/ used street drugs before the homicide.

Viewed in light of his penchant for collecting knives and viewing animal porn, his use of street drugs militates strongly in favor of the notion that Sollectio was NOT an unlikely candidate for participation in a depraved act.

Hey there TH, for someone whose handle lifts the name of a fictional pornographer, you're being ironically judgmental with the porn angle. Does everyone reacting to "2 Girls 1 Cup" on YouTube have a coprophagia fetish? I think not.

Most viewers of extreme porn are simply curious. Sounds to me that the college authorities took the correct step of "monitoring" rather than expulsion or prosecution regarding the bestiality porn incident with RF. If there were no further incidents, I'd call it case closed.

If using acid and coke in one's twenties makes that person participate in murder, I'd be doing life in prison now instead of working in IT and looking forward to retirement. That goes for most of my college friends and 30% of my current co-workers.

And knife collecting? Really? There are currently over 200,000 knife collectors selling their wares on eBay. Some of them may even do coke and view extreme porn! With those kind of numbers, I'll agree that some may be likely to participate in a "depraved act," but I'd lower the probability for a shy Italian computer student and heighten it for a member of Hell's Angels Fresno.

And, despite the argument I've presented, I doubt that this post will "militate strongly" a change of mind on your part about the guilt of the convicted. Am I right?

 

[treehorn]

An Italian judge has said it:



So now we have a judge and a reporter saying it.

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/06/perugia200806?currentPage=6

No you don't.

He's not a judge.

He's a retired Ecclesiastical Judge.

Do you even know what an Ecclesiastical court is?!

Wait. It gets worse:

Google this: "Count Neri Capponi is a judge and a lawyer, and his son Niccolo is an acquaintance of Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi..."

'nuf said.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hope you're all enjoying the Holiday Season - I used a little of my time off to check out the PBS Frontline piece on the 'Norfolk Four' (per Halides' suggestion).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/interviews/
I was amazed. Astounded.
Truly.
I've been giving it a lot of thought ever since.
What are the 'relevant differences' w/r/t the Kercher case?
What are the 'relevant similarities' w/r/t the Kercher case?
Like most law students, I studied a number of wrongful conviction cases in 1L Crim - I even went so far as to take an upper year/ optional course on the subject in 2L. However, our casebooks and related lectures didn't devote much attention to the matter of 'false confessions' in particular.
<SNIP>

Hi Treehorn,
How's it going? Good I hope!
So check this out. I was reading a little about a diary that Amanda Knox had written in while in prison back in Nov. 2007. Just after she had finished writing in it again, the police came into her cell and took this diary from her on Nov. 29, 2007.

What she had written was that she had 3 goals for her court appearance the next day, Nov. 30, 2007.
1) She wanted to confirm the memoriale the she had written on Nov. 6th, expressing doubt about the Patrick story.
2) To tell the judges that she was "SURE" that she was not there when Meredith Kercher died.
3) To assure them she'd only named Patrick Lumumba because "I was stressed and pressured by the police. They brainwashed me."*

For some reason, I don't think that Amanda Knox had ever seen that PBS Frontline piece on the 'Norfolk Four',
yet she is writing of being"brainwashed" by the pressure of the police.
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

ADD IN:
Interestingly, when court was over the next day, a person who attended the hearing had this to say:
"She proclaimed her innocence and to convince the court, she used tears, the weapon of talent. She claimed she'd spent the night at Raffaele's place. She also apologized to Patrick. The scene was beautiful, but the judges didn't burst into applause."
Author: Frank Sfarzo of Perugia Shock

How come pro-guilt believers constantly say that she did not apologize to Patrick?
It seems that Amanda Knox did so waaaay back on Nov. 30, 2007...
Correct?

*Ref: Page 230+231, Murder in Italy, Author-Candace Dempsey

 

[treehorn]

To all,

Judy Bachrach wrote, “The Italian legal system, ecclesiastical judge Count Neri Capponi informs me, will not work in Amanda’s favor. ‘Our system stems from the Inquisition and also from medieval law,’ he explains. What this means, in effect, he says, is that justice in Italy ‘is based on the supremacy of the prosecution. This nullifies the fact—written in our constitution by the way—that you’re innocent until proven guilty.’”

The key word being, "ecclesiastical."

He presided in an ecclesiastical court, i.e., a "court" that has jurisdiction in religious/ spiritual matters!

He was not/ is not a "public official"/ member of the state's independent Italian judiciary!

Do you really think you're fooling anyone?

When you have to try THAT hard to misrepresent the facts, might it not be a clue that you're on the wrong track?

 

[treehorn]

And, despite the argument I've presented, I doubt that this post will "militate strongly" a change of mind on your part about the guilt of the convicted. Am I right?

I think I understand what you're saying.

I also think it's worth noting that I didn't say "likely", I said "not unlikely."

 

[Malkmus]

The key word being, "ecclesiastical."

He presided in an ecclesiastical court, i.e., a "court" that has jurisdiction in religious/ spiritual matters!

He was not/ is not a "public official"/ member of the state's independent Italian judiciary!

Do you really think you're fooling anyone?

When you have to try THAT hard to misrepresent the facts, might it not be a clue that you're on the wrong track?

I'm pretty sure the judge knows that Amanda Knox is not being tried in an ecclesiastical court and that therefore what he says is valid. He bases this on the Italian constitution and history. Are you saying Italy has more than one constitution, and that ecclesiastical courts abide by a different one than normal criminal courts? What makes his knowledge of Italian law and history invalid just because he deals with justice of the church?

BTW, his prediction was right.

Anyhow, you should probably cite a source saying something to the contrary if you hope to prove this wrong. When an Italian judiciary member states a general fact about the Italian judiciary system they work for, there's little reason to doubt them.

 

[treehorn]

ADD IN:
Interestingly, when court was over the next day, a person who attended the hearing had this to say:
"She proclaimed her innocence and to convince the court, she used tears, the weapon of talent. She claimed she'd spent the night at Raffaele's place. She also apologized to Patrick. The scene was beautiful, but the judges didn't burst into applause."
Author: Frank Sfarzo of Perugia Shock

How come pro-guilt believers constantly say that she did not apologize to Patrick?
It seems that Amanda Knox did so waaaay back on Nov. 30, 2007...
Correct?

*Ref: Page 230+231, Murder in Italy, Author-Candace Dempsey

Hi RWVBWL.

Off the top of my head, my first guess would be your "sources" are the reason for their skepticism.

Do you have any legitimate sources reporting that there was an "apology"?



PS Why do you suppose Amanda would "apologize" if, in fact, it wasn't her fault on account of having been "brain-washed"/ coerced?

PPS Why do you suppose Amanda would write anything in a 'prison journal' after her lawyers instructed her not to do so?

The right to silence is arguably an accused's greatest 'weapon' against the state, why would she toss it away? Mmmmmm...

 

[RWVBWL]

Don't hold your breath, Kaosium. I've heard that "law school kills the 'scientific mind' -- "

Although that doesn't explain Patrizia Stefanoni.....

Hi Mary H,
I was reading something on page in a book called "Angel Face" that Barbie Nadeau authored that caught my eye about how smart Stefanoni might be:

"She has long finger nails, doesn't she?" asked Stefanoni, examining Meredith's hand.
She has medium long fingernails, corrected the officer.

Here's a female ERT expert that is collecting evidence and can not even tell the difference between medium long and long fingernails?
Does anybody have a link to a photo of this?
I'm curious to see these medium long, not long, fingernails...
RWVBWL

PS-On the previous right side page, #47, of "Angel Face" I read this:
"This was cut right off her body, Stefanoni said, shaking her head.
"Imagine. And look, we're missing a piece of the bra clasp."

It's kind of strange to think that after saying this, she did not decide to collect this bra clasp when it was found afterwards lying underneath the pillow that was shoved underneath Meredith's hips.
When Stefanoni became an expert, did she graduate at the top of her class?
Hmmm, I wonder...

 

[treehorn]

When an Italian judiciary member states a general fact about the Italian judiciary system they work for, there's little reason to doubt them.

What are you stuck on here?

He was not/ is not a member of the Italian judiciary.

We're talking about the criminal and constitutional laws of the nation state known as Italy.

Not 'church law'/ matters of faith!

 

[RWVBWL]

Firstly, I wouldn't equate Amanda and Raffaele's childhoods to that of Guede. However, this has gone past profiling. We aren't trying to pick out the most likely candidate for this crime. Are we? I mean real evidence is the only type of evidence that should be used in court, isn't it?

As for crimes, Raffaele broke into a school, a lawyer's office, and an appartment. In those places he was discovered with a stolen laptop and a stolen kitchen knife.

page 46
These episodes, concerning the Milan nursery school, the burglary in the law office in Perugia and the burglary of Tramontano'ʹs house (although for the last one, the identification of Rudy was expressed only by the phrase "ʺI believe I recognise him"ʺ) reveal obvious and notable differences with respect to the episode concerning

page 47
the broken window in Romanelli'ʹs room; even stronger differences emerge if one assumes that the person who made use of that entry was Rudy Guede.

Even if one accepts that Rudy was the burglar who broke into the law office of the lawyers Brocchi and Palazzoli and into Tramontano'ʹs house, it must be observed that Rudy was not known by these, nor by the director of the nursery school in via Plinio, Milan; this situation is entirely different from the one at via della Pergola (and the difference is not a minor one), where Rudy knew the boys from the downstairs flat and knew Meredith and Amanda, and they knew him.

In the nursery school, there was no breaking and entering and no violence with regard to any objects, or any climbing. In the law office of the lawyers in Perugia, the burglar was able to enter through "ʺa French window opening onto a small balcony overlooking the inner courtyard of the building"ʺ (p. 41 hearing of June 26, 2009), so that he was able to make use of a surface (the balcony) on which he could move with reasonable ease.[...]​

Unlike the prosecution, I find NO reason to dismiss the similarities as unimportant. Conversely, I find NO similarities with the prior history of Amanda and Raffaele that I find significant.

Hi Justinian2,
Thanks for this info once again.
I had wondered what Rudy Guede was doing since becoming jobless back in August of 2007?
From what I recall, didn't his landlord at the apartment he was living at ask Rudy, an adult male, for a letter of employment?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

 

[RWVBWL]

Many times? 3 times. You've seen 3 closing arguments. In a common law jurisdiction, correct?

I'm trained in the common lawand, as a result, haven't a clue as to the particulars of the Italian civil law tradition in this regard - that's one of the reasons I'm following the case.

In general, I find that the relevant similarities appear to far outweigh the relevant differences, and where differences exist, I'm often inclined to believe that the Italian approach may be the superior one.

Hi Treehorn,
With your knowledge,
do you think that it is OK to have a person who conducted evidence collection and also critical DNA testing LIE during a criminal case where those DNA results are being used to try and convict someone?

 

[treehorn]

Hi Treehorn,
With your knowledge, do you think that it is OK to have a person who conducted evidence collection and critical DNA testing LIE during a criminal case where those DNA results are being used to try and convict someone?

Well, I'm stuck in bed fighting the flu, so I'll bite:

No. Of course, I don't think that's "OK."

So what's your claim/ proof/ source?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Oh? You're an expert on case law concerning the nature of the RD standard and its application to the totality of the evidence?

Do tell.

I don't think I'll be posting my CV where the guy who has already been suspended once for attempting to stalk and harass people participating in this discussion can see it. That wouldn't be very rational.

Rather than fish for more information which would probably only get you into more trouble, would you care to post an actual response to my previous post?

To recap, you have made a slightly vague assertion that rather than discern and utilise logical relationships between various claims involved in a criminal case, like "If Stefan Kiszko cannot produce sperm he cannot be the murderer", that the correct cognitive procedure is to toss all the evidence together into a pot and see where it generally points overall.

Leaving aside the implied claim that if you do this you end up with a compelling case (a claim you have not defended, and probably can't since you have no coherent theory of the crime to defend), you have not established that this is a rational way to proceed in the first place. It seems to me highly unlikely that this is indeed a rational process with which to approach any complex problem.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Has anyone contacted David John Oates to see if he would be interested in doing a reverse-speech analysis of Amanda's testimony? I heard him explain his methodology on a highly regarded radio program some years back.

He might be able to shed some new light where it is needed most.

 

[Mary_H]

Hi RWVBWL.

Off the top of my head, my first guess would be your "sources" are the reason for their skepticism.

Do you have any legitimate sources reporting that there was an "apology"?

PS Why do you suppose Amanda would "apologize" if, in fact, it wasn't her fault on account of having been "brain-washed"/ coerced?

PPS Why do you suppose Amanda would write anything in a 'prison journal' after her lawyers instructed her not to do so?

The right to silence is arguably an accused's greatest 'weapon' against the state, why would she toss it away? Mmmmmm...

Do you have any evidence that Amanda's lawyers instructed her not to write in a prison diary? Remember, we are not talking about the U.S. or British legal systems here.