Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
The main fact in this case is that the prosecution cannot prove Amanda or Raffaele was in the room where Meredith was murder.
At the moment the prosecution are playing swings and roundabouts with circumstantial evidence.
 
RoseMontague said:
If the High Court "Ruled" something, I would expect to see it in the "Ruling".
I think it is a myth, perpetuated by erroneous news reports and propagated by pro-guilt factions, and certain lawyers and prosecutors connected to this case. As I said, maybe I missed it in the report, just not seeing it. Maybe it is on those missing pages that keep popping up in these things. Just saying.
Click to expand...


No, don't worry, you're not missing the point. You're absolutely correct. There's only one person who is missing the point on this issue, and it's neither you nor me. And even if the Supreme Court hadn't been so explicit in its wording in this area, the same underlying rules and logic would still apply. I suspect that the Supreme Court judges took extra care to explicitly include this point in their ruling, precisely because they wanted to be clear about decoupling their ruling from the ongoing Knox/Sollecito trial process.

I hope that pilot padron does some more reading and gains a fuller comprehension about this issue: it's quite important to get it right. And once that has happened, we hopefully won't have to bother talking about it so much.
 
BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Comodi reminds court that Italian supreme court convicted #rudyguede as one of a group of killers. #amandaknox


Expect a court censure for Comodi over this one. Fortunately, Hellmann and Zanetti are perfectly aware that the Supreme Court Guede ruling has no impact on the Knox/Sollecito trial, and that it is improper to introduce this as an argument. Comodi's doing herself - and the prosecution case - far more harm than good at the moment. She appears to be sliding out of control.
 
BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge and jury deliberating whether to accept the high court ruling on #rudyguede. #amandaknox


Jeez. Clouseau has no idea what she's talking about. They are not "deliberating whether to accept the high court ruling" - if they are doing anything, they are ruling on whether it's proper or not for Comodi to have even mentioned the Supreme Court ruling. There is no question whatsoever that the Hellmann court is considering "accepting" the ruling.
 
bri1 said:
.......
In a way, it doesn't take a scientist to understand the notion of contamination, or to read forensic collection guidelines and protocols and compare these to the crime scene videos. It just takes someone with a bit of common sense. Many non-scientists here and elsewhere were doing exactly the same thing for years.
....
Click to expand...

It seems to me that DNA contamination/transfer is like catching the flu. You don't know when, where or how you contacted the virus. But you know you did!
 
LondonJohn said:
BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge and jury deliberating whether to accept the high court ruling on #rudyguede. #amandaknox


Jeez. Clouseau has no idea what she's talking about. They are not "deliberating whether to accept the high court ruling" - if they are doing anything, they are ruling on whether it's proper or not for Comodi to have even mentioned the Supreme Court ruling. There is no question whatsoever that the Hellmann court is considering "accepting" the ruling.
Click to expand...

The SC ruling was already made a part of the court record if I remember correctly. More information needed, especially on the part about others being involved.
 
BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge denies request.... #amandaknox
36 seconds ago


Quelle surprise. I wish Nadeau wasn't so stupid, I really do. She's only been following this case for, oh, nearly four years now.
 
So what exactly happened when they went to deliberate?

What was the subject?

Nadeau, clearly, got it all wrong, again.And is the outcome a good thing for Amanda and Raffaele?
 
And that's it for prosecution closing arguments. Comodi pulls out a masterstroke (not!) by ending the prosecution case on an inadmissible reference to the Supreme Court Guede ruling. And Costagliola seemingly limits his end-of-proceedings participation to literally a handful of words asking for life sentences to be handed out.

As far as I can see (and this is from an entirely objective perspective, I hope), the prosecution's closing argument has been a total shambles. The so-called lead prosecutor has barely taken part, and both Mignini and Comodi have exposed not only the lack of a prosecution argument, but also their own personal shortcomings.

Knox and Sollecito are going to be acquitted within a week and a half.
 
contamination

codyjuneau said:
It seems to me that DNA contamination/transfer is like catching the flu. You don't know when, where or how you contacted the virus. But you know you did!
Click to expand...
That is how I look at it also. Dr. Donald Riley wrote, "Actually, it is probably easier to contaminate a PCR than to catch a cold since unlike our bodies, PCRs lack immune systems."
 
snook1 said:
So what exactly happened when they went to deliberate?

What was the subject?

Nadeau, clearly, got it all wrong, again.And is the outcome a good thing for Amanda and Raffaele?
Click to expand...


They obviously went to deliberate whether Comodi was even allowed to reference the Supreme Court Guede ruling in Hellmann's court. This should put to bed once and for all the whole issue of the Supreme Court Guede ruling and its admissibility/relevance/impact upon the trial process of Knox and Sollecito. Unless padron has anything *ahem* interesting to add to the debate, that is.....
 
LondonJohn said:
They obviously went to deliberate whether Comodi was even allowed to reference the Supreme Court Guede ruling in Hellmann's court. This should put to bed once and for all the whole issue of the Supreme Court Guede ruling and its admissibility/relevance/impact upon the trial process of Knox and Sollecito. Unless padron has anything *ahem* interesting to add to the debate, that is.....
Click to expand...

I see the guilters are saying that this is another reason for the prosecution to appeal in Supreme Court.

This is looking better and better. The closing arguments, as you said, were a complete waste of time and space. After this I can't see how Hellmann would rule any other thing than a full acquittal. I just can't.

Your words about week and a half are exactly what I needed to see. End this farse.
 
RoseMontague said:
My take on this is that Hellmann's court was just agreeing with the High Court that their ruling had nothing to do with Raffaele's case.
Click to expand...


Well yes, it boils down to the same thing. As you point out (and also pointed out earlier), the Supreme Court was careful to make this point explicitly in its Guede ruling. But Comodi was crass enough and unscrupulous enough to try to recouple the two cases. Essentially, the important fact is that any ruling in any court in Guede's trial process - up to and including the Supreme Court - cannot be used in argument or rulings in any trial for Knox/Sollecito. So what Comodi was clearly trying to do was improper, inadmissible and very poor form for a state prosecutor. Ah well, she's only hurting herself and what's left of her team's crumbling case.
 
LondonJohn said:
The evidence strongly suggests that the phone was indeed in the hands of the killer at just before 10am, but it suggests that the killer was fiddling with the phone - probably trying to turn it off - but mistakenly activating two numbers, then immediately cancelling the calls.
Click to expand...

It might be because I am newer to the discussion than many of you, but I had not heard this particular speculation before, and it hit home with me, because it also solves one of the other mysteries about the phones. Although I have always thought that it was most likely that the two "mistake" calls must have been made by the killer, not Meredith, I had always wondered A) Why did the killer try to call the bank, and the voicemail (or why play with the buttons and do that by mistake)? and B) Why did the killer not turn the phones off, and just leave them in the bedroom with Meredith?

Of course! He tried, but realized he did not know how to turn them off, and if he kept trying, he might call someone by mistake. So he took the phones and tossed them.
 
snook1 said:
I see the guilters are saying that this is another reason for the prosecution to appeal in Supreme Court.

This is looking better and better. The closing arguments, as you said, were a complete waste of time and space. After this I can't see how Hellmann would rule any other thing than a full acquittal. I just can't.

Your words about week and a half are exactly what I needed to see. End this farse.
Click to expand...


Any pro-guilt commentator saying that Hellmann's denial constitutes any sort of grounds for appeal to the Supreme Court is both ignorant and stupid. And it also shows, yet again, that such people simply don't understand the separation of Guede's rulings - at every level - from the trial process of Knox and Sollecito. It's actually a fundamental tenet of modern democratic jurisprudence that people are judged only in their own courtrooms, and only upon evidence and testimony introducted and argued within their own courtrooms. But at the same time, I'm not exactly surprised that many pro-guilt commentators don't seem to know the first thing about how the law actually works.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom