Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[CoulsdonUK]

My answer is the right one. There is no judicial system in the world in a modern democracy which would operate as you describe.

As I said a simple search provides confliting results: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/72922...ox-as-guede-loses-final-appeal?DCMP=NLC-daily

 

[Withnail1969]

As I said a simple search provides confliting results: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/72922...ox-as-guede-loses-final-appeal?DCMP=NLC-daily

That's an article by Andrea Vogt who, judging by the comments section, appears to have misunderstood Italian law.

 

[Onofarar]

There are lots of supporters from both the political right and left. I think it is great that people with different political views have both come to the same conclusion and are working together to help.

A few of the names from the right - Steve Moore, PhanuelB

Megan Kelly of Fox News has been vocal in her disagreement with the verdict.
Bill O'Reilly is doubtful/neutral - but he did allow Ann Coulter to rant a bunch of known lies in Dec 2009 to justify the verdict.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

contributions

There was a thread on drunk driving being a victimless crime a few months back. I have seen that you are one of the "newbies" on JREF that does post in other sub-forums. I wish others would as well, they would learn quite a bit about what it means to be a skeptic.

Alt+F4,

Would you put your contributions on this thread forward as an example of what it means to be a skeptic? If so, which comments in particular?

 

[Onofarar]

How does the parole system work in Italy?

There is a strong institutional bias toward early release due to systemic overcrowding in the prisons. Something like 40% of inmates are being held awaiting trial! This stat has been cited by the ECHR in its criticisms of Italy's compliance, or rather lack thereof, with the human rights treaty it signed in 1959.
(makes the 15 - 20 years it took the US South to comply with Brown vs. Board of Education Topeka KS seem like just weeks)

 

[Draca]

Francesco Maresca Interview

Francesco Maresca:

“The investigation was carried out very well, and forensic science and the police did a good job. There was just the one deficiency – and un-influential – of this blessed (bra) hook that was left behind and discovered 40 days later, but it was proven that it could not have been contaminated, using a series of technical valuations. One must consider that 368 exhibits were gathered if I’m not mistaken, and above all we made an enormous commitment of deliberating for about a year (Editor’s note: January to December, 2009), which was very quick for Italian trials. An exemplary trial considering that Italian justice system is often blamed for being slow."

There was just the one deficiency

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Maresca also opposed the previous call for a review

Could it be because it is outside the scope of the request for re-examination, does anyone know what the defence actually requested? Was it an independent re-examination of the bra clasp and knife that was originally carried out by Dr Stefanoni and others or is there a request for new examination including dismantling the knife?

CoulsdonUK,

It might be worthwhile to discuss what the defense asked for at the first trial. Andrea Vogt wrote, “Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito, asked the court to approve an independent review of several contested pieces of forensic evidence, most notably the kitchen knife with Knox's DNA on the handle and what prosecutor's argue is the Kercher's on the blade, and a bra clasp with Sollecito's DNA.
Knox's lawyers also asked for a review of the luminol-enhanced footprints, the mark on the pillowcase that the prosecution argued was a woman's shoeprint, but which the defense argues is simply a bloody crease, and several other traces of DNA found in the flat Knox and Kercher shared…. The Kercher family's attorney, Francesco Maresca of Florence, argued, however, that the court already had plenty of material to review. ‘We all know that in all trials of this nature there are different analyses of forensic evidence made by the various expert witnesses,’ he said. ‘The court must now consider the seriousness and integrity of the experts' testimony.’
Prosecutor Manuela Comodi went a step farther, saying while she did not believe a review was necessary, she would she would ‘almost be pleased’ to see the results with regard to the prosecution's footprint expert analysis.”

The request was rejected. “Immediately after the judge's announcement, Sollecito bowed his head and briefly wept, as lawyers began haggling over court dates for closing arguments.”

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Draca,

Mr. Maresca said, "hook that was left behind and discovered 40 days later, but it was proven that it could not have been contaminated." He does not know what he is talking about. The clasp might have been contaminated if it were moved by a police officer in those 46 days. The clasp was mishandled when it was finally collected, according to the evidence-handling protocols we have unearthed and discussed here many times. Moreover, no control experiments were disclosed.

 

[christianahannah]

Withnail1969

Well the context is the Italian judicial system. There was 2 separate trials but one police investigation and notwithstanding yours and others belief in Raffaele and Amanda's innocence, they were all charged with exactly the same Penal Codes. Media reports on whether evidence or the ruling of the higher court can be used was as usual conflicting, like you I do not know the answer but I was hoping that someone with an understanding of the Italian system might know the answer. Given the timing of Guede's final appeal the motivational report will be published before the DNA re-examination findings.

Frank from Perugia-Shock wrote of this entering of the trial of Rudy and how it may or may not be used in the appeals of Amanda and Raffaele.

The information is in the first paragraph at the link.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2010/12/dna-study-admitted-for-knox-and.html

I believe he is saying the Supreme Court confirmation of Guede's sentence can be entered into the record. What exactly the Guede appeal motivations will state remains to be seen. I don't know that it would implicate Amanda or Raffaele by name but rather state that Rudy was not a lone attacker of Meredith.

Regardless of the opinion of the court, the Guede appeal motivations may be determined to be obsolete depending on the review of evidence by the independent experts and any other review Hellmann later considers.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsdonUK,

It might be worthwhile to discuss what the defense asked for at the first trial. Andrea Vogt wrote, “Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito, asked the court to approve an independent review of several contested pieces of forensic evidence, most notably the kitchen knife with Knox's DNA on the handle and what prosecutor's argue is the Kercher's on the blade, and a bra clasp with Sollecito's DNA.
Knox's lawyers also asked for a review of the luminol-enhanced footprints, the mark on the pillowcase that the prosecution argued was a woman's shoeprint, but which the defense argues is simply a bloody crease, and several other traces of DNA found in the flat Knox and Kercher shared…. The Kercher family's attorney, Francesco Maresca of Florence, argued, however, that the court already had plenty of material to review. ‘We all know that in all trials of this nature there are different analyses of forensic evidence made by the various expert witnesses,’ he said. ‘The court must now consider the seriousness and integrity of the experts' testimony.’
Prosecutor Manuela Comodi went a step farther, saying while she did not believe a review was necessary, she would she would ‘almost be pleased’ to see the results with regard to the prosecution's footprint expert analysis.”

The request was rejected. “Immediately after the judge's announcement, Sollecito bowed his head and briefly wept, as lawyers began haggling over court dates for closing arguments.”

Halides1

Do you know whether the defence teams requested the dismantling of the knife in their appeals?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Frank from Perugia-Shock wrote of this entering of the trial of Rudy and how it may or may not be used in the appeals of Amanda and Raffaele.

The information is in the first paragraph at the link.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2010/12/dna-study-admitted-for-knox-and.html

I believe he is saying the Supreme Court confirmation of Guede's sentence can be entered into the record. What exactly the Guede appeal motivations will state remains to be seen. I don't know that it would implicate Amanda or Raffaele by name but rather state that Rudy was not a lone attacker of Meredith.

Regardless of the opinion of the court, the Guede appeal motivations may be determined to be obsolete depending on the review of evidence by the independent experts and any other review Hellmann later considers.

Christianahannah

Guede's final appeal ended in December 2010, I believe motivational reports are usually released 90 days after a verdict, therefore, the unknown contents would be public before the scheduled date on the DNA re-examination report.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

That's an article by Andrea Vogt who, judging by the comments section, appears to have misunderstood Italian law.

Is this source more acceptable?

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/20...-knox-and.html

 

[Withnail1969]

Is this source more acceptable?

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/20...-knox-and.html

I read it. It certainly doesn't say anything like you appeared to be claiming was the case, that the decision in Rudy's trial would trump everything else and the defendants might as well give up. Your link appears to be broken BTW.

 

[Draca]

Draca,

Mr. Maresca said, "hook that was left behind and discovered 40 days later, but it was proven that it could not have been contaminated." He does not know what he is talking about. The clasp might have been contaminated if it were moved by a police officer in those 46 days. The clasp was mishandled when it was finally collected, according to the evidence-handling protocols we have unearthed and discussed here many times. Moreover, no control experiments were disclosed.

Like Mark Waturbury said - kick a square of chocolate around the room and then store in under a rug for six weeks and see if you think it's contaminated.

"was left behind and discovered 40 days later' - as if that little bra clasp was the ONLY piece of evidence left behind. Because it was so small they didn't see it even after videotaping it. And the other item?

Here's the rest of the interview:
http://www.corrieretandem.com/viewstory.php?storyid=10645&page=1

 

[christianahannah]

Christianahannah

Guede's final appeal ended in December 2010, I believe motivational reports are usually released 90 days after a verdict, therefore, the unknown contents would be public before the scheduled date on the DNA re-examination report.

Yes, I know that the motivations would be public 90 days after the verdict. However, if the motivations even remotely alludes to Amanda and Raffaele (along with Rudy) as having contributed to Meredith's death, that information could be null if new information from the independent review (concerning the bra clasp and knife) or even Curatolo's re-testimony, rules out Amanda and Raffaele having anything to do with Meredith's death.

Hellmann also reserved the right to review some of the other defense requests contained in the appeals of Amanda and Raffaele so who knows what that may reveal or whether it will favor the prosecution or defense.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I read it. It certainly doesn't say anything like you appeared to be claiming was the case, that the decision in Rudy's trial would trump everything else and the defendants might as well give up. Your link appears to be broken BTW.

I made no statement. I asked a question, I stated the media reports were conflicting based on the link supplied by Christianahannah portions of Guede final appeal could be used by either the prosecution or defence.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Yes, I know that the motivations would be public 90 days after the verdict. However, if the motivations even remotely alludes to Amanda and Raffaele (along with Rudy) as having contributed to Meredith's death, that information could be null if new information from the independent review (concerning the bra clasp and knife) or even Curatolo's re-testimony, rules out Amanda and Raffaele having anything to do with Meredith's death.

Hellmann also reserved the right to review some of the other defense requests contained in the appeals of Amanda and Raffaele so who knows what that may reveal or whether it will favor the prosecution or defense.

I fully acknowledge the appeal will ebb and flow, it is at this stage what if's and supposings. Time will tell

 

[christianahannah]

I fully acknowledge the appeal will ebb and flow, it is at this stage what if's and supposings. Time will tell

It is sad for the family of Meredith that there is no finality right now; it is hopeful for Amanda and Raffaele that they are able to somewhat present their case a second time.

You are correct, time will tell and I hope that whatever it does tell it will be able to be accepted to the satisfaction of most, if not all.

 

[Chris C]

I don't have the link right now, but the silly girl who is "playing" Amanda suggested it in an interview (ET, maybe).

Did you refer to a grown woman as a girl? Guess its ok for guilters.

 

[Chris C]

I have a theory as to why the major media in the U.S. have not taken a pro-guilty stance. They know that eventually Amanda will do an interview and by staying in good with the Knox/Mellas' they have a better chance of getting that interview.

American media have plenty of things to use that appeal to Americans. They would actually get more viewers if a guilty Knox appealed to America from Italian prison rather than a just recently released Knox. If Knox gets released from prison, you very well might hear about it one night in the media, and then they will move on. They reason they most likely shy away from the pro-guilty stance is because of the mis-information the Prosecution released early into this case. They still remember the duke lacrosse thing and shy away from corrupt prosecutors. However isn't it just as much news as targeting a convicted corrupt prosecutor that holds an innocent american girl in prison. American media foam at the mouth over stories like that. Yet they haven't been pushing that story either.