Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[katy_did]

Contrary to expectations Costagliola threw his full force behind Mignini today.


Does anyone here know anything about the co-judge Massimo Zanetti?

He's the one who talked at the beginning of the appeal about the only certain fact being Meredith Kercher's death. Frank thinks highly of him too:

The appeal trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito certainly bears the mark of assistant judge Massimo Zanetti. ‘I am a concrete person’, this truthful Umbrian loves to repeat. And we noticed. He doesn’t seem to be the one who buys stories, fables or pieces of paper… A confession or a DNA profile written on a piece of paper? A lunatic who saw the murderers? Intimations from comics or Halloween?

No way. A guy like this wants to see facts, concrete facts. He is making history with his questions that are unmasking one by one all prosecution witnesses. When there is something you wish to know from a witness there’s no problem, at the end the very Umbrian voice of Zanetti resounds in the courtroom, and poses him that question.

 

[Ammonitida]

I must say that I'm very worried. The defense can not afford to let the other prosecution "evidence" go unchallenged. When it's time for them to give their closing arguments, the defense must stress the counter explanations for the "bloody footprints", "bathmat footprint", "mixed-blood", etc. I hope they don't spend the majority of their time debunking the DNA evidence because at this point that would be like beating a dead horse. A lot of focus should be on Rudy Guede and the evidence against him (especially his history as a cat burglar) because that is paramount in establishing the most plausible scenario of what happened that night. The similarity between his burglary of that lawyer's office and the break-in through Filomena's window needs to be emphasized.

The "mixed-DNA" issue I am especially worried about. While the last judge correctly disregarded the idea that the samples in question were of "mixed blood", he erroneously concluded that because they were mixed, they must have been deposited at the same time -- implicating Amanda. There are scientific studies that refute this notion, but is the new judge even aware of this? How about the defense team?

 

[RoseMontague]

He's the one who talked at the beginning of the appeal about the only certain fact being Meredith Kercher's death. Frank thinks highly of him too:

Thank you katy_did. Sounds like a rational judge to me.

 

[LondonJohn]

Contrary to expectations Costagliola threw his full force behind Mignini today.


Does anyone here know anything about the co-judge Massimo Zanetti?

Well, my meetings morphed into a night out, but I've just got back and caught up....

Firstly, of course Costagliola "threw his full force behind Mignini" (whatever that even means) today. In case you've forgotten - and it appears that plenty of commentators and even media inside the court have forgotten - Costagliola is actually the lead prosecutor on this appeal trial. Costagliola is therefore not only one of the prosecutors of the case against Knox and Sollecito in the appeal trial, he's nominally the head of the prosecutor team! It would therefore be utterly inconceivable for Costagliola to do anything other than be entirely supportive of the prosecution's case. I have no idea why you think that anything otherwise would be the case.

But much more pertinent a point for you to have raised would have been this: why did Costagliola limit his participation today to a general "introduction" speech, and then hand the baton over to Mignini - a prosecutor who shouldn't even be present in the court in this trial, and whose role is supposed to be merely one of support and assistance? And in a wider sense, why has Costagliola been virtually mute throughout the entire appeal trial? I think you might find these questions to be far, far more telling than any overt statements of intra-prosecutor support.

Finally, my take on today is that Mignini is an increasingly out-of-control despot who is throwing everything into a last-ditch attempt to salvage both this case and his reputation. I am practically certain that he will fail in both endeavours. As others have pointed out, as far as I can tell, Mignini made absolutely no progress today in meeting the prosecution's burden of proof that Knox/Sollecito participated in the murder. I also can't believe that some members of the media who ought to know far better are seemingly reporting today's proceedings as a "setback" to Knox and Sollecito, when in fact it is absolutely nothing of the sort. All that happened today (and for the next few days) is that the prosecution (and victim's representative) is attempting to persuade the court that Knox and Sollecito killed Meredith. So we are hearing just one side of the story right now, and not only that, it's an exceptionally weak side of the story when viewed objectively and dispassionately.

It's clear to me now that prosecutors have no coherent case to put forward, and that they're consequently trying to obfuscate, bluster and misdirect with character smears and appeals to emotion. Obviously they will have a crack at rehabilitating the knife/clasp evidence (but they will fail), and it seems that they are even in such trouble that they are trying to give Curatolo's testimony some weight!! Believe me, if the prosecution had a strong case, there is absolutely no way whatsoever that they would be trying to rehabilitate Curatolo, and it's also probable that they wouldn't waste so much time and effort fighting the Conti/Vecchiotti DNA report.

If prosecutors had a strong case that was based on other evidence/testimony, they would clearly be confident enough to tell the court something like this: "Well, we think Curatolo's testimony was accurate and reliable, but we realise that his testimony is open to some question. And we realise that there are questions over the knife and bra clasp. But just to be clear, let's put these pieces of evidence aside for one moment. We don't even need these pieces of evidence in order to prove to you that Knox and Sollecito participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher."

The fact is that prosecutors don't have anything near to sufficient proof of Knox's/Sollecito's guilt. As a matter of fact, they didn't have anything near to sufficient proof at the time of the first trial, but they benefited (in my view) from defence mistakes, a very poor, credulous, prosecution-friendly judge in Massei, and the overwhelming weight of public opinion that believed Knox and Sollecito to be vicious killers. As of today, not only has key evidence/testimony from the first trial been properly re-evaluated and found to be bogus, the lead judge in the appeal appears to be fair-minded and disinterested, and there has been a very large shift in public opinion (to the degree that prosecutors pointedly complained about it today!).

Knox and Sollecito are going to be acquitted in early October. I am to all intents certain of it. Not only has nothing I observed today changed my mind on that, today's proceedings have actually tended to strengthen my belief that acquittals are inevitable. Everyone should bear in mind that the next few days will quite naturally be dominated by prosecution talking points. But wait until all sides have presented their case. At that point, even the most clueless journalist in the courtroom (OK, maybe not Vogt, but everyone else....) will be clearly able to see which way the verdict is going to go.

 

[Ammonitida]

For some reason I still have a bad feeling about this.

I'm going 60/40 in favor of acquittal based on the insanity the Italian system has shown so far. Let's hope I'm wrong.

Me too. I'm like 10/90 in favor of conviction. Throughout this whole appeal, no independent reviews were ordered for the other forensic "evidence". Now the defense team will have to rely on the same arguments from the last trial -- most of which failed to sway the jury. Although they were very good arguments, they would have more weight if they were confirmed by independent reviews.

 

[RoseMontague]

Nice post LJ. I guess they told the court the break in was staged, never mind the theory of how that was done makes no sense. And the footprint is Sollecito's, never mind it looks like Rudy's. And Curatolo was right about the buses because the night he talks about they were not there. LOL. Very effective. All emotional appeals today, trying to make Amanda out to be the devil incarnate.

 

[RoseMontague]

Me too. I'm like 10/90 in favor of conviction. Throughout this whole appeal, no independent reviews were ordered for the other forensic "evidence". Now the defense team will have to rely on the same arguments from the last trial -- most of which failed to sway the jury. Although they were very good arguments, they would have more weight if they were confirmed by independent reviews.

Believe me, Raffaele's appeal is enough on some of this stuff.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

He's the one who talked at the beginning of the appeal about the only certain fact being Meredith Kercher's death. Frank thinks highly of him too:

Was it Zanetti or was it Helmann?

Either way, let's hope that the Defence put up a much stronger show this time around.

 

[RoseMontague]

I thought that as well to be fair, as I believe John Kercher is wedded to the prosecution 'case' much more BUT, having read Arline in today's Daily Mail, she actually seems to be pointing to Amanda - DISAPPOINTED at Arline but we did fear the prosecution and/or Maresca using tricks like this on the eve of closing arguments....BOLDING and underlining in her quote is mine.



''...Whoever killed Meredith knew her well, she had her trust but that was betrayed. That’s what I can’t understand. My daughter was killed in her home. Not in a park or on the road, her body wasn’t found dumped somewhere.''

''...In these four years we have never stopped thinking about her. It’s as if she was here with me still. I’m not bothered about the names of who was convicted - Rudy, Amanda, Raffaele. What counts for me is that my daughter was murdered by someone who in the first trial was found guilty and sentenced. There was a lot of evidence in that trial, but now I’m asking myself where has that all gone?''

''They are focusing on just two elements, but what about the other stuff? What has changed from the first trial? I accepted the verdict of the first trial and I will accept the verdict of the appeal but what I want is justice for my daughter.''

Link below:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...h-Kerchers-family-speaks-appeal-restarts.html

You are right about this. Disappointing.

 

[katy_did]

Was it Zanetti or was it Helmann?

Either way, let's hope that the Defence put up a much stronger show this time around.

It was Zanetti, when he gave a summary of the first trial and of the appeal documents at the opening of the appeal (see articles here, here & here).

''Nel riassumere questa tragica vicenda si deve partire da un unico fatto certo e obiettivo: il ritrovamento del cadavere di Meredith Kercher il 2 novembre del 2007'' ha detto subito il giudice Massimo Zanetti per poi cominciare a riassumere l'intera vicenda giudiziaria e gli appelli presentati dalle parti.

 

[pilot padron]

Yes, I guess maybe all the "Its over" was clueless cheerleading

I agree: There is a bad feeling to this. I think the past few weeks pro-innocence people (myself included) have been declaring victory when it was far from certain. Far from certain...

Interesting that Barbie Nadeau's latest Daily Beast is much closer to what smk is saying than to the "they will be free at any hour" that was so rampant here after the C&V was leaked.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-snag-with-prosecutor-s-closing-argument.html

This paragraph IMHO sums up theme of Article".

Like so many twists and turns in the four years of this dreadful murder case, today’s events made a ripple in what has until now seemed to be a positive appeal for Knox. The appellate process has led many to believe that she was falsely convicted based on a damning report by independent forensic experts condemning the police and laboratories that processed the crime scene. Those truly obsessed with the case won’t change their opinions, but casual followers were quick to comment that perhaps the conviction was right all along.

Her closing sentence was particularly poignant to me
"No matter what happens, her (Knox's) fate will most certainly be much better than Kercher’s." .

Interesting also that Barbie is alternately revered and/or ridiculed here.
She has followed this case more closely than any other Italian speaking writer.
Whenever she writes something favoring innocence she is treated here like Moses delivering Tablets of Stone.
However if she dare express a thought here that possibly Knox and Sollecito were indeed very involved in the death of Meredith Kercher, a stream of vile invectives and vicious vitriol is directed at her, both as a person and as a writer.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

You are right about this. Disappointing.

Yes and I completely forgot the thought from Arline that ''whoever killed Meredith knew her well...''

How on earth can she put forward this view? Surely that HAS to be the result of Maresca et al?

I only hope that she is serious about accepting the appeal verdict.

For her own sake.

RIP Meredith.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

It was Zanetti, when he gave a summary of the first trial and of the appeal documents at the opening of the appeal (see articles here, here & here).

Thanks katy-did.

I should have known you'd know better than me.

 

[Dougm]

Interesting that Barbie Nadeau's latest Daily Beast is much closer to what smk is saying than to the "they will be free at any hour" that was so rampant here after the C&V was leaked.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-snag-with-prosecutor-s-closing-argument.html

This paragraph IMHO sums up theme of Article".

Like so many twists and turns in the four years of this dreadful murder case, today’s events made a ripple in what has until now seemed to be a positive appeal for Knox. The appellate process has led many to believe that she was falsely convicted based on a damning report by independent forensic experts condemning the police and laboratories that processed the crime scene. Those truly obsessed with the case won’t change their opinions, but casual followers were quick to comment that perhaps the conviction was right all along.

Interesting also that Barbie is alternately revered and/or ridiculed here.
She has followed this case more closely than any other Italian speaking writer.
Whenever she writes something favoring innocence she is treated here like Moses delivering Tablets of Stone.
However if she dare express a thought here that possibly Knox and Sollecito were indeed very involved in the death of Meredith Kercher, a stream of vile invectives and vicious vitriol is directed at her both as a person and as a writer.

Her closing sentence was particularly poignant to me
"No matter what happens, her (Knox's) fate will most certainly be much better than Kercher’s." .

That closing sentence was particularly lame to me. Why does she set it up to be a competition between Meredith and Amanda? How is Meredith's fate being worse (certainly than Amanda's, Raffaele's, Rudy's, yours, or mine) relate to whether there is evidence to prove who killed her?

 

[Grinder]

Me too. I'm like 10/90 in favor of conviction. Throughout this whole appeal, no independent reviews were ordered for the other forensic "evidence". Now the defense team will have to rely on the same arguments from the last trial -- most of which failed to sway the jury. Although they were very good arguments, they would have more weight if they were confirmed by independent reviews.

Without the knife and bra there is nothing really connecting the kids to the murder night.

The rest of the evidence - luminol prints, bath mat, "staged" break-in, mixed blood and DNA, etc. - doesn't really hold water without the knife and bra.

For example, no one would say that the mat print is a match for Raffaele. They said it was compatible with him and they argued that it was more compatible than with Rudy. But without him being there because of the bra, it really is no proof. They could never have IDed him from that print.

The luminol prints either just look like a blob or as Rose has pointed out just don't match Amanda's feet.

If the defense can parlay the DNA foibles of the LE and repeat over and over again descriptions of the bad collection practices combined with the police chief showing that LE created the interrogation statements, I think the judges will see there is at least RD.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

That closing sentence was particularly lame to me. Why does she set it up to be a competition between Meredith and Amanda? How is Meredith's fate being worse (certainly than Amanda's, Raffaele's, Rudy's, yours, or mine) relate to whether there is evidence to prove who killed her?

I had to smile at how Barbie's posting of a ripple being caused could be pounced upon as something significant on a day devoted to prosecution arguments!

rip·ple1 [rip-uhl] Show IPA verb, -pled, -pling, noun

verb (used without object)

1. (of a liquid surface) to form small waves or undulations, as water agitated by a breeze.
2. to flow with a light rise and fall or ruffling of the surface.
3. (of a solid surface) to form or have small undulations, ruffles, or folds.
4. (of sound) to undulate or rise and fall in tone, inflection, or magnitude.

 

[Grinder]

Interesting also that Barbie is alternately revered and/or ridiculed here.
She has followed this case more closely than any other Italian speaking writer.
Whenever she writes something favoring innocence she is treated here like Moses delivering Tablets of Stone.
However if she dare express a thought here that possibly Knox and Sollecito were indeed very involved in the death of Meredith Kercher, a stream of vile invectives and vicious vitriol is directed at her, both as a person and as a writer.

I have never revered her and never will. She has no experience as a reporter for this sort of story and did a crumby job from day one. The one and only reason she has had a forum for her writing is that she was nearby and didn't cost the DB much.

I would say her reviews have varied more elsewhere.

 

[LondonJohn]

Interesting that Barbie Nadeau's latest Daily Beast is much closer to what smk is saying than to the "they will be free at any hour" that was so rampant here after the C&V was leaked.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-snag-with-prosecutor-s-closing-argument.html

This paragraph IMHO sums up theme of Article".

Like so many twists and turns in the four years of this dreadful murder case, today’s events made a ripple in what has until now seemed to be a positive appeal for Knox. The appellate process has led many to believe that she was falsely convicted based on a damning report by independent forensic experts condemning the police and laboratories that processed the crime scene. Those truly obsessed with the case won’t change their opinions, but casual followers were quick to comment that perhaps the conviction was right all along.

Interesting also that Barbie is alternately revered and/or ridiculed here.
She has followed this case more closely than any other Italian speaking writer.
Whenever she writes something favoring innocence she is treated here like Moses delivering Tablets of Stone.
However if she dare express a thought here that possibly Knox and Sollecito were indeed very involved in the death of Meredith Kercher, a stream of vile invectives and vicious vitriol is directed at her both as a person and as a writer.

Her closing sentence was particularly poignant to me
"No matter what happens, her (Knox's) fate will most certainly be much better than Kercher’s." .

I think you'll find that Nadeau (aka Clouseau) is not respected at all here, regardless of what she's writing. She is not intelligent or balanced enough to be reporting objectively or accurately about this case, and her "opinions" have changed on the wind more than once. Today she has once again demonstrated her ignorance and lack of separation/balance as she seems to have been swayed by the simple fact that prosecutors were granted the entire day in court to argue their case - and there was nothing that anyone (including Nadeau) had not heard before. So if she had a certain opinion about the case yesterday, there's simply nothing that should have made her change her view about it today. I can be virtually certain, for example, that when it's the days of the defence closing arguments, Clouseau will probably be back to writing stuff about how acquittal is lookin g more likely. She's lightweight, susceptible to extreme short-termist opinionating rather than looking at the wider picture, and already over-invested in the case for guilt ("Angel Face: The true story of student killer Amanda Knox", anyone...?). She's a stringer for failing news outlets, and I doubt anyone will see her byline popping up anywhere significant after the acquittals.

Oh, and the final sentence of her latest piece encapsulates pretty much all that is worthless about her journalistic credibility and intelligence. As Matthew Chance of CNN pointed out earlier today, it's a false and misleading (and intentionally misleading in most instances) comparison to measure Knox's (and, ahem, Sollecito's, Barbie) suffering to that endured by Meredith Kercher. If Knox and Sollecito had nothing to do with Meredith's murder, they have unjustly suffered at least 3.5 out of the near-4 years they have spent incarcerated, and their families have suffered commensurately. Nobody denies that the greater loss happened to Meredith Kercher and her family/friends, but that's irrelevant in this context.

If Knox/Sollecito had nothing to do with the murder, they had no more right to have spent the past few years of their lives in prison than you, me or Prince William. Such comparisons to the ultimate suffering of Meredith Kercher, and the ongoing suffering of her family, are nothing more than an unpleasant appeal to emotion which has no place in an objective assessment of Knox's/Sollecito's role in the murder.

 

[Dougm]

I think you'll find that Nadeau (aka Clouseau) is not respected at all here, regardless of what she's writing. She is not intelligent or balanced enough to be reporting objectively or accurately about this case, and her "opinions" have changed on the wind more than once. Today she has once again demonstrated her ignorance and lack of separation/balance as she seems to have been swayed by the simple fact that prosecutors were granted the entire day in court to argue their case - and there was nothing that anyone (including Nadeau) had not heard before. So if she had a certain opinion about the case yesterday, there's simply nothing that should have made her change her view about it today. I can be virtually certain, for example, that when it's the days of the defence closing arguments, Clouseau will probably be back to writing stuff about how acquittal is lookin g more likely. She's lightweight, susceptible to extreme short-termist opinionating rather than looking at the wider picture, and already over-invested in the case for guilt ("Angel Face: The true story of student killer Amanda Knox", anyone...?). She's a stringer for failing news outlets, and I doubt anyone will see her byline popping up anywhere significant after the acquittals.

Oh, and the final sentence of her latest piece encapsulates pretty much all that is worthless about her journalistic credibility and intelligence. As Matthew Chance of CNN pointed out earlier today, it's a false and misleading (and intentionally misleading in most instances) comparison to measure Knox's (and, ahem, Sollecito's, Barbie) suffering to that endured by Meredith Kercher. If Knox and Sollecito had nothing to do with Meredith's murder, they have unjustly suffered at least 3.5 out of the near-4 years they have spent incarcerated, and their families have suffered commensurately. Nobody denies that the greater loss happened to Meredith Kercher and her family/friends, but that's irrelevant in this context.

If Knox/Sollecito had nothing to do with the murder, they had no more right to have spent the past few years of their lives in prison than you, me or Prince William. Such comparisons to the ultimate suffering of Meredith Kercher, and the ongoing suffering of her family, are nothing more than an unpleasant appeal to emotion which has no place in an objective assessment of Knox's/Sollecito's role in the murder.

What he said.

 

[Malkmus]

Interesting also that Barbie is alternately revered and/or ridiculed here.
She has followed this case more closely than any other Italian speaking writer.
Whenever she writes something favoring innocence she is treated here like Moses delivering Tablets of Stone.
However if she dare express a thought here that possibly Knox and Sollecito were indeed very involved in the death of Meredith Kercher, a stream of vile invectives and vicious vitriol is directed at her, both as a person and as a writer.

I've seen this happen at PMF, but not here.