Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[katy_did]

Katy,

the judges needed it. After all the morbid and seriously disgusting crap from Maresca yesterday, I'm glad she did it. Emotionally that will swing people to your side. It's a way of distancing themselves from what Marseca did.

It's a form of black humor (in a way) and a good way of releasing tension.

It is a very good sign indeed that they laughed with the defense. Very good sign,

Dave

Agreed, Pacelli and Maresca really went overboard with the character assassination/shock tactics yesterday. Can't imagine it was very pleasant for the judges either. Definitely a good sign that they are laughing with the defence.

Sleep well!

 

[LondonJohn]

So it appears that Bongiorno is delivering what I had always expected: a tight, well-constructed argument that takes on the argument for guilt head-on, and dismantles it piece by piece. I have every confidence that by the end of today she will have succeeded in cementing the acquittals of not only her client, Sollecito, but also Knox. And I also suspect that Dalla Vedova and Ghirga will produce a similarly strong display on Thursday.

I think everyone needs to remember that from Friday through to yesterday we had only heard one side of the story. And not only that, we had heard a side of the story that was improperly embellished with appeals to emotion and character assassinations. By the end of Thursday, we will have heard both sides of the story. And by then, the truth will be abundantly clear.

One other thing: I suspect that media headlines will swing towards acquittal, in the same way as they swung towards guilt while prosecutors and civil parties were having their day in court. But large sections of the media have already proven themselves to be fickle and short-termist in the way they report this case. And the media love to deal in volatility: it sells papers and attracts viewers. Therefore it's wise to discount the more extreme swings in media presentation, and stick with what more reasoned log-term observers of the trial have known for a long time now: Knox and Sollecito are going to be acquitted, and they will leave prison without a single stain on their characters arising from the sad, tragic murder of Meredith Kercher.

 

[LondonJohn]

Agreed, Pacelli and Maresca really went overboard with the character assassination/shock tactics yesterday. Can't imagine it was very pleasant for the judges either. Definitely a good sign that they are laughing with the defence.

Sleep well!

And it's worth pointing out again that the antics of Pacelli and Maresca (and Mignini/Comodi) might conceivably have had an improper influence on an Anglo-Saxon jury of 12 ordinary people - regardless of any direction a judge might give them in this regard. But in an Italian judicial panel, where two seasoned professional judges serve on the jury and lead the deliberations, there's virtually no chance that these sort of tactics will have any effect.

And because of that, I can only conclude that the behaviour of all these lawyers was primarily aimed at the families. media and general public. I suspect that at least some of those who argued for guilt between Friday and yesterday are wise and experienced enough to realise that this trial is only going one way. And if that's the case, then throwing caution to the wind and pulling out the old fire-and-brimstone act is possibly the best thing to do. It won't prevent the acquittals, but at least people will remember them for trying.....

 

[Fine]

Aren't the TV people and Sollecito family indicted for showing the gruesome Meredith's body images to the public? Maresca just did the same.

____________________

Katody,

No, Maresca did worse. The images of nude Meredith, and her wounds, on TV were tame in comparison to the images Maresca publicly showed yesterday in court.

The TV program can be seen HERE. Warning: Graphic Content.

///

 

[snook1]

My mood today is much better...Hopefully Bongiorno will go all the way today.

 

[bri1]

morsels morsels
Defense explains how during phone taps police were referring to people as bitch and whore. very professional #amandaknox

I presume that 'people' refers to Amanda?!
This sums up the whole case, IMO.

 

[GreyFox]

And to think yesterday she was just a witch.

 

[katy_did]

And it's worth pointing out again that the antics of Pacelli and Maresca (and Mignini/Comodi) might conceivably have had an improper influence on an Anglo-Saxon jury of 12 ordinary people - regardless of any direction a judge might give them in this regard. But in an Italian judicial panel, where two seasoned professional judges serve on the jury and lead the deliberations, there's virtually no chance that these sort of tactics will have any effect.

And because of that, I can only conclude that the behaviour of all these lawyers was primarily aimed at the families. media and general public. I suspect that at least some of those who argued for guilt between Friday and yesterday are wise and experienced enough to realise that this trial is only going one way. And if that's the case, then throwing caution to the wind and pulling out the old fire-and-brimstone act is possibly the best thing to do. It won't prevent the acquittals, but at least people will remember them for trying.....

Unfortunately I don't think judicial panels are immune to these kinds of shock tactics/character assassination, even with two professional judges involved (after all, Pacelli's speech was no different really to the one he gave in the first trial, where the jury convicted). The judges are all human, after all. However, I do think that in this case, both the professional judges have shown they're unlikely to be swayed by this sort of blatant manipulation.

I agree that Maresca's showing of the pictures was partly aimed at the press (as Frank says in his latest post, it's significant that Maresca's 'apology' was about 'forgetting' to ask for the press to be sent out - the press, not the audience). But I also think it was just a final, desperate attempt to get a conviction, using whatever shameful tactics he could think of.

 

[LondonJohn]

morsels morsels
Defense explains how during phone taps police were referring to people as bitch and whore. very professional #amandaknox

I presume that 'people' refers to Amanda?!
This sums up the whole case, IMO.

And Bongiorno raises the important issue that we've discussed here before: if the police were tapping Knox's and Sollecito's phones by around 3rd/4th November, then they had to suspect Knox/Sollecito of some form of serious criminal offence. They either suspected Knox/Sollecito of direct involvement in the murder, or they suspected them of covering for the murderer and lying to the police. Either way, it's clear that Knox and Sollecito should have been interviewed as suspects on the night of 5th/6th November.

By the way, since Bongiorno is now talking about the inadmissibility of the DNA evidence, it's probably worth pointing this out once again: anyone trying to make the argument that since a) cases have been solved through DNA identification decades after the crime, therefore b) the 46-day delay in collecting the bra clasp is irrelevant, is either ignorant or mendacious. If evidence containing DNA is properly collected and stored, it can indeed be kept for decades without there being doubt that the DNA is uncontaminated and relevant. It's an entirely different situation to that of the bra clasp, which was moved around in a dirty room for those 46-days, before being improperly passed around and dropped by the "crack" forensics bods with the dirty gloves.

 

[LondonJohn]

Unfortunately I don't think judicial panels are immune to these kinds of shock tactics/character assassination, even with two professional judges involved (after all, Pacelli's speech was no different really to the one he gave in the first trial, where the jury convicted). The judges are all human, after all. However, I do think that in this case, both the professional judges have shown they're unlikely to be swayed by this sort of blatant manipulation.

I agree that Maresca's showing of the pictures was partly aimed at the press (as Frank says in his latest post, it's significant that Maresca's 'apology' was about 'forgetting' to ask for the press to be sent out - the press, not the audience). But I also think it was just a final, desperate attempt to get a conviction, using whatever shameful tactics he could think of.

Totally agree with your second para. But in regard to the first, I still think it's a mistake to think that Massei's court was swayed by appeals to emotion and character assassinations. I think Massei's court found for guilt because the judicial panel decided to go with the prosecution reasoning on the important bits of evidence. If you "reason" that the evidence shows Meredith's DNA on a knife found at Sollecito's apartment with Knox's DNA on the handle, and if you "reason" that Knox and Meredith were bleeding at the same time, and if you "reason" that the bloody footprint on the bathmat is Sollecitos (and also that it "proves" a concerted post-murder clean-up of the floor!), then you're bound to find for guilt. That's why they were found guilty in Massei's court. It was all about bad reasoning on the evidence that mattered. And I don't think that any subliminal character assassinations or other underhand prosecution tactics need have played any part in that poor reasoning.

 

[GreyFox]

Mignini and his talk of nazi propaganda, yet what's he telling the courts himself? Not to listen to the rest of the world,just listen to him. Go ahead and drink the kool aid it'll be ok.

 

[katy_did]

Totally agree with your second para. But in regard to the first, I still think it's a mistake to think that Massei's court was swayed by appeals to emotion and character assassinations. I think Massei's court found for guilt because the judicial panel decided to go with the prosecution reasoning on the important bits of evidence. If you "reason" that the evidence shows Meredith's DNA on a knife found at Sollecito's apartment with Knox's DNA on the handle, and if you "reason" that Knox and Meredith were bleeding at the same time, and if you "reason" that the bloody footprint on the bathmat is Sollecitos (and also that it "proves" a concerted post-murder clean-up of the floor!), then you're bound to find for guilt. That's why they were found guilty in Massei's court. It was all about bad reasoning on the evidence that mattered. And I don't think that any subliminal character assassinations or other underhand prosecution tactics need have played any part in that poor reasoning.

Oh, of course: there were a multitude of factors no doubt, interpretation of any ambiguous evidence as pointing towards guilt being crucial. Nonetheless, saying the 'arguments' put forward by Pacelli can't possibly have any impact on a jury is tantamount to saying negative pre-trial publicity can have no effect on a jury, and I would wholly disagree with that. It's not what we might call a direct influence, of course - no juror is going to say 'I think she's guilty because she's a witch!' - but that doesn't mean it has no influence at all. And I don't think the presence of the two professional judges necessarily precludes that, unfortunately (though as I said, I do think it will greatly help in this particular case, due to the characters of the judges involved).

 

[RoseMontague]

Thanks katy_did et al for the updates, just getting up this morning.

Maresca's apology makes no sense to me. doesn't the court have access to these pictures already? Is he saying that he doesn't believe they have looked at it? Isn't he suing somebody for doing this?

He is lower than worm slime, in my opinion. Has there been a comment from the Kercher family on this?

 

[LondonJohn]

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Bongiorno invokes results of independent experts & says that the presence of #rudyguede proves he was the only assassin in room. #amandaknox


So what were all the "well-informed" pro-guilt commentators saying about the defence teams "abandoning" the lone-assailant theory?

But apart from that, I'd say that Bongiorno isn't technically correct (if this has been properly reported). It's more appropriate to say that the evidence in Meredith's bedroom only proves the presence of one person - Guede - and that it's consistent with Guede being the lone killer. I don't think the evidence proves that Guede was the lone killer though.

 

[LondonJohn]

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Bongiorno: If #amandaknox or #sollecito were in the room there would be a trace. They weren't there.


I don't like this line of argument at all. The point is that there is nothing in the murder room showing the presence of Knox or Sollecito. It's fair to argue that one would expect them to have left some evidence of their presence, but I don't think it's possible to say that lack of evidence somehow proves they weren't there.

To my mind, Bongiorno should be sticking to the hard evidence (and lack of evidence) in her argument, and the firm inferences that can be drawn from that evidence (or lack thereof). And the important factor is that none of the evidence leads to an inference of guilt. In my opinion, she needs to refrain from drawing inferences of innocence that the evidence simply can't adequately support.

 

[katy_did]

Maresca's apology makes no sense to me. doesn't the court have access to these pictures already? Is he saying that he doesn't believe they have looked at it? Isn't he suing somebody for doing this?

Morning Rose. I think he was apologizing for not having the press removed or having given a warning before showing the pictures? That's what I gather from Frank's latest anyway:

We love Meredith, we respect Meredith, we are compassionate to her family. In four years we never published a picture of her slaughtered body.

When we needed to analyze something, like the bruises on her chin, or the semen stain, all the rest of her body was covered.

Her own lawyer Francesco Maresca as well had, of course, the same respect.
Whenever was the case of showing some pictures in court (last friday, for instance) he asked and obtained the hearing to continue behind closed doors. When a TV network aired her wounds (just for the Puglia audience and for a few seconds) he immediately went after them (and a trial is on for that).

Today her lawyer needed to show her body. Just like nothing, he asked the room to be obscured and he showed a bunch of bloody pictures with all details of her butchered body. Immediately the audience was horrified—–someone was crying, someone couldn’t watch..
[...]
By the way, Maresca then, before asking the conviction of Amanda and Raffaele apologized with the court and with Meredith’s family, and explained that he forgot asking the press to be sent out. (Yes, he didn’t say “the audience”, he said “the press”, interesting…) .

 

[RoseMontague]

If his purpose was to show the court the photo's and not anyone else, could he have just handed them the folder showing the pictures that I am sure they have already seen anyway? I just made a brief skim through at a couple of pro-guilt sites. Has there been even one poster at such a place who objected to this?

I think MM might have picked the lesser of two evils when she spoke out yesterday.

 

[LondonJohn]

If his purpose was to show the court the photo's and not anyone else, could he have just handed them the folder showing the pictures that I am sure they have already seen anyway? I just made a brief skim through at a couple of pro-guilt sites. Has there been even one poster at such a place who objected to this?

I think MM might have picked the lesser of two evils when she spoke out yesterday.

No, of course not. It's what's known as selective indignation. By contrast, there's been a full court press on Michelle Moore's two-word insult. There have even been alleged solicitors claiming that this will have harmed Knox's chances! (For the record, if Michelle Moore did indeed say that to Mignini in court, it was stupid and improper, and might have ramifications for Michelle Moore herself. But it will have no bearing whatsoever on the case against Knox/Sollecito.)

It will also be interesting to see whether the Kercher family make any comment about the nasty stunt pulled by their own lawyer in their own name. I suspect that there might be some selective indignation and selective criticism taking place there as well.

 

[RoseMontague]

Let me ask this to anyone that reads here and you can answer wherever. Is there anyone that thinks these pictures will not eventually be plastered all over the web? Will it have been worth it?

 

[katy_did]

If his purpose was to show the court the photo's and not anyone else, could he have just handed them the folder showing the pictures that I am sure they have already seen anyway? I just made a brief skim through at a couple of pro-guilt sites. Has there been even one poster at such a place who objected to this?

I think MM might have picked the lesser of two evils when she spoke out yesterday.

Yep, it was obviously just a shock tactic. From what I saw of the pro-guilt sites there was mostly just cheering on of Maresca, though perhaps I missed some objections, not sure. If anything is exploiting the victim, it's what Maresca did yesterday. I have to say that Moore's article on this is very good and very powerful.

The graphic, obscene, desecrating photographs shown today had no evidentiary value. No legitimate purpose was served by the photographs. Nothing about the murder scene was in dispute in this session. Nothing about Meredith’s death, her condition at the time of death, or her body was in play. In short, there was no reason in the entire legal world to show detailed photographs of the violated body of his clients’ child and sister. No reason except money. The display was gratuitous, designed to horrify and shock a jury. And it horrified. And it shocked. But maybe only the conscience of decent people. Several people left the courtroom, and many were left traumatized.