Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Alt+F4]

Extradition is an executive function in Italy. So they could grant an extradition to Washington State on say a speeding charge .... Along with many other mechanism. Will they is one thing. Can they is clear cut.

"Can they" is not clear cut at all. Extradition to the State of Washington government is impossible. Extradition treaties between foreign governments are at the federal (or national, depending on the country) level. Again, the State of Washington has nothing to do with this case. If extradition were even possible (I don't think it is) Amanda would end up in federal prison, which is not a nice place, even for women.

 

[Kaosium]

Hahahaha. You're not a Cheesehead, are you?!!

(Mind you, for my sins, I'm a Bills fan. I saw them play (and met Jim Kelly and Marv Levy) as a teenager when they played an exhibition match at Wembley Stadium in around 1989, so I've followed them ever since. Question is, do I stay up for the rest of the AFC Championship game....? I think the answer will have to be yes )

Indeed I am.
Oddly enough, it was the fact that Buffalo was so filled up for something on the past fourth of July weekend when I was on vacation last summer that I found out about this case. We had to continue past it halfway to Rochester to stay in some dumpy motel with no remote which caused me to have to endure news of a court case, which since about the first month of the OJ trial I avoided like the plague.

The news came on and I was a captive audience, and it said something about that girl whose name I didn't even know but vaguely recalled hearing about a couple years back might have to serve six years in jail for 'slander' even if acquitted in her appeal, but there were no tapes of the interrogation available. That didn't make any sense to me at all, and at least the wi-fi worked in that dump so I had to figure out why that might be. I discovered this fascinating subject and spent the night of my vacation reading about it after hours. Then I decided to come back to it when the report had been translated in the fall.

Poor Bills, it's a tragedy that team never won one, but being as my Dad was from upstate New York but a Giants fan (no AFL when he was growing up) the only one they had a chance to win was the one we were all rooting against them. However no one can ever take away that second half against the Oilers in the playoffs that one year: Frank Reich, Andre Reed--perhaps the greatest game of all time.

Geez--looks like we're going to be playing the Steelers--yuck! Played them last year and Big Ben threw for 500 yards. That's not a typo, 500 yards. We had the best pass defense in the league going into that game, obviously not afterward though.

 

[Alt+F4]

Most judges in the United States need to run for office over and over. Few appointments are for life.

All federal judges are appointed and all serve for life.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

"Can they" is not clear cut at all. Extradition to the State of Washington government is impossible. Extradition treaties between foreign governments are at the federal (or national, depending on the country) level. Again, the State of Washington has nothing to do with this case. If extradition were even possible (I don't think it is) Amanda would end up in federal prison, which is not a nice place, even for women.

Does Italy permit extradiction in the case of capital crimes?

 

[LondonJohn]

Wow we really are disagreeing.

Just so that we are agreeing on the definition of "rarely" here is the list for 8 years of GW Bush (who is not exactly a softee). I think its pretty heavily used on this side of the pond. So was that point just a difference or rarely or you didn't realize it was still this heavily used?

As for abolished let me just give an example. Had it not been for the first 2 pardons: Philip Vigol and John Mitchell from George Washington Western Pennsylvania and Ohio would have been essentially occupied territory in 1791. They still had Fries rebellion even with most people liking how the Whisky rebellion ended and so the hostilities ended by the end of the 18th century. If you count Shays rebellion where they pardoned the leaders in Mass which was essentially the same thing but a bit north.

Think about what the war of 1812 looks like without those pardons. The US national government was having to fight an enemy at sea at the same time it had to maintain a hostile occupation on the other side of the adirondack mountains. I think you Brits would have won the war of 1812 and recaptured your colony. Jefferson, if he is even on the side of the National government and not trying to split Virginia off doesn't dare make the Louisiana purchase for fear or adding more western lands. Heck those western parts of the country might be actively trying to side with the French.

Its hard to know how this turns out but my guess is that the states fall apart and the territory which is now the USA at looks like Africa. And all so we could hang a few extra guys?

To pick a recent British example your judiciary was only too happy to essentially engage in an act of war by trying to arrest Tzipi Livni. And there were a few other earlier incidents where the executive had to leak these warrants to avoid committing acts of war. I would never trust judges on political matters. Fundamentally why have judges issue ruling the executive will not enforce?



Why? They could be honest about it. The government could just say, "we don't think holding Knox is in Italy's interest so we are sending her back". What would the outcry be? I have yet to hear anyone even try and defend how this is in Italy's interest.

Well, we're not disagreeing on the most important and salient point underlying all this, which is that Knox and Sollecito were wrongly convicted of the murder of Meredith Kercher. And, as I said before, I think that all this stuff about pardons and extraditions is moot, because I have a pretty strong belief that the appeal court will fix the injustice of the first trial.

I continue to believe that powers of the executive branch to issue pardons or sentence commutes is deeply undemocratic, and an affront to the principals of a proper judiciary. I was aware of Bush's general pardoning record (but note that nearly all of these pardons were for white-collar crimes or - curiously - drug offences). And I remain certain that neither pardons, extraditions nor US political pressure will be used to help Knox if she fails in her appeals. Not that any of them will even be necessary - in my opinion......

 

[Alt+F4]

The government could just say, "we don't think holding Knox is in Italy's interest so we are sending her back".

I'm sorry but you have little understanding of how a legal system works in a modern, Constitutional or Parlimentary democracy. The "government" just can't "send her back".

 

[CDHost]

"Can they" is not clear cut at all. Extradition to the State of Washington government is impossible. Extradition treaties between foreign governments are at the federal (or national, depending on the country) level. Again, the State of Washington has nothing to do with this case. If extradition were even possible (I don't think it is) Amanda would end up in federal prison, which is not a nice place, even for women.

Extradition is generally sought for state crimes. Under your theory I can murder just anyone other than an active duty military, postal worker, congressional staffer.... and then go to Mexico and live in peace. Of course Washington would be involved. This is a very different situation from your other scenario where she serves her murder sentence here. Its a Washington crime what would be be in Federal Prison for? So assume its a bench warrant for unpaid parking ticket from Washington State. The federal government can't enforce Washington regulation. She appears in Washington court and then the Italians just don't seek to get her back.

Standard extradition as if she was just living there.

 

[Kaosium]

I agree with Rose, I thought Massei said she was barefoot. So if he says she is barefoot, then in point of fact, he is admitting that a shoeprint can't possibly be hers.

It's like he wants to keep his options open as to whether Rudy's shoeprint or the irrelevant luminol prints 'match' better at some time in the future.

Who'd murder anyone barefoot anyway? They 'knew' she would have come from Raffaele's, she took her shoes off to murder?

Please.

 

[CDHost]

I'm sorry but you have little understanding of how a legal system works in a modern, Constitutional or Parlimentary democracy. The "government" just can't "send her back".

See the other two dozen posts on mechanism.

 

[Alt+F4]

Well, we're not disagreeing on the most important and salient point underlying all this, which is that Knox and Sollecito were wrongly convicted of the murder of Meredith Kercher.

No, that is just your opinion.

I do agree with you though that there will be no pardons, no extradition, no prison transfer and no involvement whatsoever from the United States government.

 

[Kaosium]

The more I learn about this case, the more I'm convinced that the defence teams did a woefully substandard job in the first trial. I realise that there were issues outside their control (such as many of Mignini's manoeuvres and Massei's "reasoning"), but even so, their failure to deal properly with Curatolo, Quintavalle and Capezalli, coupled with their seeming inability to properly assimilate and refute much of the key scientific and medical evidence (the DNA validity, time of death, cellphone evidence) is worrying and absolutely not to their credit.

However, at least they seem to have learned from their (many) mistakes, and they've also benefited from some additional legal firepower behind the scenes. I hope they realise that they've only really got one more try to get it right........

What more could they have done about some of those witnesses? How much more could they have done to discredit Quintavalle for instance? I accept that they made mistakes, hammered home when I saw that bit about the juror who thought Amanda and Meredith's blood had mixed in the sink.

It sounds like they did let down their guard though, things like letting that phantom phone call '12:00--before anything happened' get through hurt. Let us hope with a 'rehearsal' they get it right.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I really can't see this happening under any circustances. I understand what you're saying, and I understand your driving logic up to a point, but I cannot for one moment believe that any US politician or member of the executive or judiciary branch would dream of instigating formal censure against Italy if Knox failed in her appeals. For one thing, the Italian judiciary - the branch of the Italian government which is wholly responsible for Knox's fate - is completely separate from (and independent of) the Italian executive and legislature. So any political, trade/economic or military cooperation penalties aimed at Italy would be hitting the wrong target. The Italian exectutive would rightfully say that this is entirely a matter for the Italian judiciary,and that it (the executive) is totally powerless to intervene itself.

I think that your prediction of US intervention if Knox remains convicted is based on a combination of wishful thinking and some misunderstanding about the separation of powers in modern democracies. It simply will not happen - I can virtually guarantee it.

However, all that being said, I firmly believe that this is a moot argument, since I am now very confident that Knox's (and Sollecito's) conviction will be overturned at this first appeal stage...

I wish I could share your optimism about the appeal. I see Hellmann as another scared bunny, cowering before Mignini and Maresca... "oh, well, of course we won't dismantle the knife if you fine gentlemen object..." This guy is not interested in getting at the truth.

With regard to the political arena, of course there will be no "formal censure" of Italy. But the issue could interfere with normal economic and political relations, behind the scenes.

 

[Kaosium]

The Calunnia laws suppress free speech about government. That can't ever be good.

One thing I've wondered about is just how many of the calunnia charges are there per year? Is this some relic that was dug out of the past just to slap on Amanda, or is it a relatively common occurrence? I wouldn't think the latter as the lawyers would know better you'd think...

 

[Danceme]

Perhaps you can dig up the testimonies of Armando Finzi and Stefano Gubbiotti so you can review again what we do know about how Raffaele's kitchen knife was handled by the police. Pay particular attention to what Finzi says he placed the knife in and what Gubbiotti says he removed the knife from.

Well from the posted quote, the following descriptions appear;

"He put it in a new paper envelope he had with him and then in a folder. The bag with the knife inside was handed over to Superintendent Gubbiotti when he returned to the Police Headquarters.

.....and that it was inside a new and well-*‐‑sealed envelope.

.....he took the knife from the bag and put it inside a box that he sealed with scotch tape....."

He put the knife in an envelope which was then put in a 'folder', which in the next referral is called a 'bag'. This 'bag', which contained the knife in the envelope, was then brought to police headquarters where the knife in the envelope was removed from the bag, but not the envelope, and placed in a box to be sent to Rome.

That's the way I read it. It doesn't seem to have been taken out of the well sealed envelope, just the bag the envelope was placed in.

 

[CDHost]

All federal judges are appointed and all serve for life.

Agreed. The post dealt with all levels and mentioned differences explicitly several times.

 

[CDHost]

Does Italy permit extradiction in the case of capital crimes?

If they get an assurance that the prosecution won't seek the death penalty. That's an EU policy and one that Italy has been a huge champion of.

Extradition Agreement with the European Union, art. 13, entered into force Feb. 1, 2010, S. TREATY DOC. 109-
14 (provision that may be applied in place or in absence of comparable requirement in existing extradition agreement
between the United States and an EU Member State, stating that when “the offense for which extradition is sought is
punishable by death under the laws in the requesting State and is not punishable by death under the laws in the
requested State, the requested State may grant extradition on the condition that the death penalty shall not be imposed
on the person sought, or if for prosecural reasons such condition cannot be complied with …, on the condition that the
death penalty if imposed shall not be carried out.”

 

[Kaosium]

Why can't it be a joint effort between US Senators and Italian parliamentarians an Italian citizen Raffaele has been just as wronged in this trial as Amanda

I think it will be more the Parliamentarians than the Senators personally. I think we've already seen that in action.

 

[Kaosium]

I wish I could share your optimism about the appeal. I see Hellmann as another scared bunny, cowering before Mignini and Maresca... "oh, well, of course we won't dismantle the knife if you fine gentlemen object..." This guy is not interested in getting at the truth.

Maybe he saw the truth when he saw them object?

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Maybe he saw the truth when he saw them object?

If so, why did he yield to their request that the knife not be dismantled, after initially telling the consultants it would be ok to do so?

 

[JREF2010]

I wish I could share your optimism about the appeal. I see Hellmann as another scared bunny, cowering before Mignini and Maresca... "oh, well, of course we won't dismantle the knife if you fine gentlemen object..." This guy is not interested in getting at the truth.

With regard to the political arena, of course there will be no "formal censure" of Italy. But the issue could interfere with normal economic and political relations, behind the scenes.

yes, I see that a bit in reading it was Maresca and COmmodi that disputed the handle being removed, right? I thought when I read that, "what are they doing there yelling objections? Isn't there a new Prosecutor, what is he there for then?"

I dont claim to understand Italian laws, but why is Maresca and Mignini and Commodi there?

Girgha was quoted as saying he's never seen anything like it before , having these ex-prosecutors added to the new trial.