Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[davefoc]

A mild defense of Machiavelli:

Machiavelli has relentlessly stayed on topic. He has rarely gotten even in to the gray area of breaking the rule against personalizing the discussion. He is currently the only poster in this thread representing an unpopular view. He has put up with a number of posts that are clearly in the gray area with regard to the personalization of the topic.

We may not like his view and we may feel that his posts have suggested that he is letting unspecified personal interests restrict his objectivity but the fact is that he has stuck almost always to arguments associated with the topic.

He has also made points and clarifications on the topic which have not been effectively rebutted and he has made posts which are obviously correct. I for one have corrected misunderstandings that I have had about the case as a result of his posts.

A significant difficulty with this case for many of us is that we don't know where the primary source material is or the primary source material is only available in Italian and many of us don't speak Italian. Since I strongly believe that RS/AK are innocent I tend to accept at face value* the claims of the pro-innocent posters here. Machiavelli makes me realize that my knowledge base could be slanted because of my personal inability to access the primary source material.

Particular examples of this include Machiavelli's claim that the Hellman court rejected the new evidence provided by the defense on hard disk analysis and Machiavelli's claim that Guede's testimony about his letter did not suggest that Guede had not written the letter because he didn't understand some of the words in the letter. What is the truth of these claims? I don't know and I lack the ability to make a personal determination of the truth of these claims.

*ETA: Well I also read the links and supporting documentation. I still like to see a little documentation from the people that I agree with before I accept their claims.

 

[Chris C]

An acquittal or a conviction becomes valid in this sense in Italy only when gains the status of "giudicato". Until then the person is under trial, as acknowledged internationally, by all countries the US State department included. There is no sentence of acquittal of this kind on Amanda Knox, nor on Raffaele Sollecito. An extradition treaty cannot protect Amanda if she's convicted, because it's a treaty, based on mutual acknowledgment of legal effects.

Under the extradiction treaty, with Italy, for a person to be extradited it has to meet the standards of both countries. Not just Italy's.

 

[smkovalinksy]

A mild defense of Machiavelli:

Machiavelli has relentlessly stayed on topic. He has rarely gotten even in to the gray area of breaking the rule against personalizing the discussion. He is currently the only poster in this thread representing an unpopular view. He has put up with a number of posts that are clearly in the gray area with regard to the personalization of the topic.

We may not like his view and we may feel that his posts have suggested that he is letting unspecified personal interests restrict his objectivity but the fact is that he has stuck almost always to arguments associated with the topic.

He has also made points and clarifications on the topic which have not been effectively rebutted and he has made posts which are obviously correct. I for one have corrected misunderstandings that I have had about the case as a result of his posts.

A significant difficulty with this case for many of us is that we don't know where the primary source material is or the primary source material is only available in Italian and many of us don't speak Italian. Since I strongly believe that RS/AK are innocent I tend to accept at face value the claims of the pro-innocent posters here. Machiavelli makes me realize that my knowledge base could be slanted because of my personal inability to access the primary source material.

Particular examples of this include Machiavelli's claim that the Hellman court rejected the new evidence provided by the defense on hard disk analysis and Machiavelli's claim that Guede's testimony about his letter did not suggest that Guede had not written the letter because he didn't understand some of the words in the letter. What is the truth of these claims? I don't know and I lack the ability to make a personal determination of the truth of these claims.

Yes, granted.

 

[Rolfe]

Particular examples of this include Machiavelli's claim that the Hellman court rejected the new evidence provided by the defense on hard disk analysis and Machiavelli's claim that Guede's testimony about his letter did not suggest that Guede had not written the letter because he didn't understand some of the words in the letter. What is the truth of these claims? I don't know and I lack the ability to make a personal determination of the truth of these claims.

I don't know either, of myself. However, I have noted that Machiavelli is not always factually correct. I await clarification from others.

Rolfe.

 

[daydreamer]

Amanda Knox Accuser Couldn’t Read His Own Accusations

There will be no criminal charge of sort and no element has ever emerged to suspect any wrongdoing.
Your allegations are false: they just never happened.

From SeattlePi:

"Bizarrely, instead of explaining himself, Rudy relied on a handwritten letter he’d written in 2010, already leaked to the press. Even more bizarrely, he claimed that his own handwriting was illegible and he could not read it–a task Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini magically achieved when he read the letter out loud.

The judge queried Rudy about the letter, asking if he understood every word of it. Well, maybe not the larger ones."

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/06/27/amanda-accuser-couldnt-read-own-accusations/

Machi, how do you explain this?

 

[Grinder]

From SeattlePi:

"Bizarrely, instead of explaining himself, Rudy relied on a handwritten letter he’d written in 2010, already leaked to the press. Even more bizarrely, he claimed that his own handwriting was illegible and he could not read it–a task Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini magically achieved when he read the letter out loud.

The judge queried Rudy about the letter, asking if he understood every word of it. Well, maybe not the larger ones."

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/06/27/amanda-accuser-couldnt-read-own-accusations/

Machi, how do you explain this?

For me Candace has never been a good source. She wasn't there most of the time, her Italian is less than fluent and she has had a heavy bias from day one.

Having said that I read elsewhere that Rudy had Mignini read his letter . Perhaps an Italian speaker could find material on Rudy's testimony.

 

[Mary_H]

Under the extradiction treaty, with Italy, for a person to be extradited it has to meet the standards of both countries. Not just Italy's.

Welcome back, Chris C! I've been wondering where you were.

 

[Kaosium]

A mild defense of Machiavelli:

Machiavelli has relentlessly stayed on topic. He has rarely gotten even in to the gray area of breaking the rule against personalizing the discussion. He is currently the only poster in this thread representing an unpopular view. He has put up with a number of posts that are clearly in the gray area with regard to the personalization of the topic.

We may not like his view and we may feel that his posts have suggested that he is letting unspecified personal interests restrict his objectivity but the fact is that he has stuck almost always to arguments associated with the topic.

I would agree that Machiavelli sticks to the point, and also that some latitude should be granted from posters (not getting into MA politics!) to someone who is making an unpopular case, as that too is of value. He has been a valuable contributor to these threads in my opinion, moreso at some times than others, like everyone on occasion.

He has also made points and clarifications on the topic which have not been effectively rebutted and he has made posts which are obviously correct. I for one have corrected misunderstandings that I have had about the case as a result of his posts.

Beware the power of sophistry and semantics!

This is how you can end up with the denial that the interrogation was illegal despite the fact it was definitely in violation of article 141 bis of the Italian Code and was thrown out by the Supreme Court as evidence against her in the murder trial. This one goes as follows if I recall correctly: Since Mignini is an incorruptible quester of Truth, when Amanda wrote her note including 'accusations' of abuse, then Mignini was required to open an investigation and determine the validity of her claims. Since he didn't find enough evidence to file a charge, then the officers (and himself!) were all cleared of wrongdoing, thus since no charges were filed the interrogation wasn't 'illegal.' Note at this time Mignini was still lying about having been there during the latter part of the interrogation, so at one time it didn't seem quite so ridiculous.

How did he just put it regarding Stefanoni and the negative TMBs? Something to the effect she presented them in court? Yeah, she did that after saying she hadn't done any further blood tests, then it came up by accident when someone (Comodi?) went out for a cigarette and the malfeasance was discovered. Then the line became she didn't lie because TMB is only a presumptive blood test (like Luminol!) so she didn't really lie because it's not a confirmatory test, which they never did.

So in other words she only presented them in court after being caught lying about it, and we're supposed to believe she was just waiting for the right moment to produce them? Something like that happened to my understanding, I don't have a link to it though, I do know the cigarette episode was reported one of the days she testified by Frank Sfarzo at Perugia Shock, however that is before the restored archives unfortunately, and the rest part of the guilt argument which I accepted as the prosecution excuse, though I think it might also have been in Dr. Waterbury's 'Monster of Perugia.' I am certainly willing to be corrected if my understanding is inaccurate or incomplete.

A significant difficulty with this case for many of us is that we don't know where the primary source material is or the primary source material is only available in Italian and many of us don't speak Italian. Since I strongly believe that RS/AK are innocent I tend to accept at face value* the claims of the pro-innocent posters here. Machiavelli makes me realize that my knowledge base could be slanted because of my personal inability to access the primary source material.

A great deal of it can be found at Injustice in Perugia. There's a number of crime scene videos, documents and links to other venues with primary source material and translations and analysis.

Particular examples of this include Machiavelli's claim that the Hellman court rejected the new evidence provided by the defense on hard disk analysis and Machiavelli's claim that Guede's testimony about his letter did not suggest that Guede had not written the letter because he didn't understand some of the words in the letter. What is the truth of these claims? I don't know and I lack the ability to make a personal determination of the truth of these claims.

Note there's a difference between having the hard drives completely re-examined, which was denied at the outset of the appeal, and accepting the addendum to the appeal documents. I didn't get an answer to my question and didn't follow up, but considering the rest of the appeal documents seemed to have been perused by the court as they ought to have been, it's not like any of that came up in the appeal and they did exonerate with a 530.1 code, thus it would seem they must have found the arguments compelling. However at this juncture we do not know for certain if the recovered data from the screensaver file were amongst the arguments accepted by the court. I would bet that the opening of the Naruto file was though, going by analysis on this thread. The Hellmann Report will tell us for certain.

As for the letter, I didn't follow that exchange too closely, I don't recall exactly what he said. I do know some were surprised by words used, notably one for tranquility starting with an 'A' and containing an 'X' that Bunnies insisted was not uncommon parlance in that environment. At any rate you can view the handwriting on the letter compared to his diary entries for a different sort of comparison and determine for yourself what it might mean.

Regarding the former,
*ETA: Well I also read the links and supporting documentation. I still like to see a little documentation from the people that I agree with before I accept their claims.

Perfectly understandable, as saying 'read the threads' at this juncture might be considered something of a threat in some jurisdictions!

 

[Rolfe]

At any rate you can view the handwriting on letter compared to his diary entries for a different sort of comparison and determine for yourself what it might mean.

K, you have got to be joking! There's no way on earth these two examples were written by the same person! I don't think even deliberate disguising of the handwriting could achieve that effect.

Do we have any examples of Mignini's handwriting?

Rolfe.

 

[Chris C]

Welcome back, Chris C! I've been wondering where you were.

South America mainly. Not pleasure though, all business. Finally back in the states. Like i was saying though. Italy can't extradite Knox because of Double Jeopardy. Regardless of how someone views how Italy's legal system works. Once the second appeal(trial) rendered a non-guilty verdict Knox can't be legally extradicted because its against American law. A jury did find Knox not guilty. The Italian Supreme Court can overturn the not guilty verdict but Knox can't be extradited.

With that being said, I'm sure there is some guilter out there thinking that Italy could always charge her with a new felony count and have her extradited for that. Italy could do that but they would be in violation of the treaty if they tried to make her serve time for any conviction that she couldn't be extradited for. And before she was even transported to Italy there would be a clause in her extradition that would required italy to return her without having to serve anytime for her murder conviction if the not guilty verdict was overturned. Of course any felony crime they charged her for would have to be a felony criminal crime in both countries.

 

[AmyStrange]

Well said...

Whats she proven to be a liar of? Who typed up that first statement in a language knox can't read? How did they know what to write in the statement word for word without a taped interrogation? If knox is guilty of being a liar then its just as logical to declare that there was a taped interrogation of the whole event. If they typed up that statement without a taped copy, then hows it a legitimate confession or statement from Knox to be used against her? After all, its the interrogators typing up their own interpretation, from their memory, of a statement that knoxs doesn't believe in the verity of to begin with. Of course it could be just as simple as them not understanding the definition of verity.

-

Chris,

plus, since the prosecution pushed the ToD (Time of Death) to a later time (approx. 11:30 pm) that means Patrick no longer had an alibi, so who knows for sure if Patrick didn't help Rudy kill Meredith.

I mean with a later ToD, there's as much evidence against Patrick as there was against Amanda, which is not much evidence at all.

For all Mach knows, she might have accused the right person which means there was no slander.

Personally I agree with you, they added the "Patrick killed Meredith" phrase even though she didn't actually say it and hoped she didn't notice. In short, she didn't know what she was signing. That's not a voluntary statement in my opinion.

It's just weird that she would say that phrase and not even explain how she knows he killed her. She said they went in the other room for Christ sake, and then covered her ears and that's the end. Fini. Nothing more.

The statements (confessions/ accusations) are weird to begin with (they sound more like a dream than anything else), but that phrase just puts it over the top,

Dave

 

[Kaosium]

K, you have got to be joking! There's no way on earth these two examples were written by the same person! I don't think even deliberate disguising of the handwriting could achieve that effect.

Do we have any examples of Mignini's handwriting?

Rolfe.

Heh, that's a common reaction, it doesn't look close to me either. I cannot recall off the top of my head whether there is anything available containing Mignini's handwriting.

I guess I did read this at some point, though I found an Italian reader's analysis more insightful than puzzling out the Google Translate. The one word specifically that some had difficulty believing was common parlance amongst the low-life thug community Rudy ensconced himself in was 'ataraxia.'

Down the Rabbit Hole they claimed that it was a shining example of someone who'd been raised with French and took to Italian at an early age. Apparently 'Ataraxia' is also a band, so they assured people Rudy would know it and what it meant. That part kinda sounded like google-fu to me though.

I'll just say this, regarding another facet. The language used here is interesting and it reminds me of the end of the classic Star Trek episode "Mirror, Mirror," (the one where Spock had a beard) where it was said something to the effect of 'it's easier for a civilized man to pretend to barbarism than a barbarian to appear civilized.'

As usual in this our beloved beautiful country, false people, devoted to the mendacity there are a lot.

Just as there are those who give voice to them in the slightest consciousness without asking whether it is worthwhile to give some room for speculation.

In recent days I have heard nothing but blasphemies against me insinuations, false rumors, who did nothing but loot here and there for the television news channels, although for those common sense, pure invention of a wicked mind. It must be said that what I heard in the past days in the media about how this being falsely declared to be unclean by the name of Mario Alessi, whose conscience is not nothing but a stinking rubbish, just ramblings and only a sick and twisted mind , his: and false statements fantasized of an ogre, as known to all Italy, staining of a horrendous murder where the private life of a small human angel.

He now mendaciously saying things I never said I did not and never have said, things that are not in heaven or on earth. In these his, or better tell them, rotten declarations, I intend to put pen to paper, I with this be filthy I never told, since then I have nothing to confess or whatever and that all I have to say the judges have said and will continue as long as I live to scream and fight until the truth itself and justice itself is not prevalerà of these lies, much less have spoken with others individually or with other inmates what story of my case and, if I ever had anything to say, do not believe that I talked to my lawyers?

And give rise to the claim that a blasphemous statement from a diseased mind, an ogre who had no mercy on a child.

With this additional staging which I, my lawyers and my family have become accustomed, the latter by the ogre Alessi (...) I hope that the Italians and the rest of the world to realize that pigs have to do, ask who they are and smell of the mud of lies, but who nonetheless go around to show their face and suffocate people with their stench of deception. By their umpteenth staging does nothing but give me the strength and awareness of the fight more than ever that the truth is that they intend to hide from all eyes.

For me in me the serenity and tranquility of mind ataraxia full right of those who does not flaunt quest'ingiusta pain, but because I trust in justice and right in the sense of the Italians, and finally I hope that sooner or later judges are aware of the strangeness of what my total was a horrible murder of a beautiful wonderful girl who was Meredith by Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox.

Rudy Guede

 

[Kaosium]

South America mainly. Not pleasure though, all business. Finally back in the states. Like i was saying though. Italy can't extradite Knox because of Double Jeopardy. Regardless of how someone views how Italy's legal system works. Once the second appeal(trial) rendered a non-guilty verdict Knox can't be legally extradicted because its against American law. A jury did find Knox not guilty. The Italian Supreme Court can overturn the not guilty verdict but Knox can't be extradited.


With that being said, I'm sure there is some guilter out there thinking that Italy could always charge her with a new felony count and have her extradited for that. Italy could do that but they would be in violation of the treaty if they tried to make her serve time for any conviction that she couldn't be extradited for. And before she was even transported to Italy there would be a clause in her extradition that would required italy to return her without having to serve anytime for her murder conviction if the not guilty verdict was overturned. Of course any felony crime they charged her for would have to be a felony criminal crime in both countries.

Hi Chris! I too was wondering where you'd gone to and missed you. Last I recall seeing you was the release of the Conte-Vecchiotti Report. Have you read it? I'd be interested in your input if you have, I recall you made some interesting posts regarding the y-halotype at one time, and I'm not entirely clear on that, though it appears they did determine it 'corresponded' to Raffaele's.

What do you think would happen were they to convict her in absentia of the other calunnia charge and sentenced her to an amount that would require her to serve more time? My inclination is that since there's no equivalent of criminal slander like that it would be stillborn, and have seen others suggest the same.

 

[Chris C]

Hi Chris! I too was wondering where you'd gone to and missed you. Last I recall seeing you was the release of the Conte-Vecchiotti Report. Have you read it? I'd be interested in your input if you have, I recall you made some interesting posts regarding the y-halotype at one time, and I'm not entirely clear on that, though it appears they did determine it 'corresponded' to Raffaele's.

What do you think would happen were they to convict her in absentia of the other calunnia charge and sentenced her to an amount that would require her to serve more time? My inclination is that since there's no equivalent of criminal slander like that it would be stillborn, and have seen others suggest the same.

I'm still not entirely positive of what they decided on the bra clasp. As for the calumnia charge, its not extraditable. Knox is in the states. They are just wasting everyones money by continuing those charges. Italys tax payers are gonna front that bill because they will never see a dime. Patrick might get some of that money that knox won in italy from her lawsuit. Other than that, no one else will get any money(other than the lawyers). Mainly because US views slander differently. Is Maresca still working for free? Or are the Kerchers paying him now?

 

[Mary_H]

Originally Posted by Rudy Guede?
As usual in this our beloved beautiful country, false people, devoted to the mendacity there are a lot.

Just as there are those who give voice to them in the slightest consciousness without asking whether it is worthwhile to give some room for speculation.

In recent days I have heard nothing but blasphemies against me insinuations, false rumors, who did nothing but loot here and there for the television news channels, although for those common sense, pure invention of a wicked mind. It must be said that what I heard in the past days in the media about how this being falsely declared to be unclean by the name of Mario Alessi, whose conscience is not nothing but a stinking rubbish, just ramblings and only a sick and twisted mind , his: and false statements fantasized of an ogre, as known to all Italy, staining of a horrendous murder where the private life of a small human angel.

He now mendaciously saying things I never said I did not and never have said, things that are not in heaven or on earth. In these his, or better tell them, rotten declarations, I intend to put pen to paper, I with this be filthy I never told, since then I have nothing to confess or whatever and that all I have to say the judges have said and will continue as long as I live to scream and fight until the truth itself and justice itself is not prevalerà of these lies, much less have spoken with others individually or with other inmates what story of my case and, if I ever had anything to say, do not believe that I talked to my lawyers?

And give rise to the claim that a blasphemous statement from a diseased mind, an ogre who had no mercy on a child.

With this additional staging which I, my lawyers and my family have become accustomed, the latter by the ogre Alessi (...) I hope that the Italians and the rest of the world to realize that pigs have to do, ask who they are and smell of the mud of lies, but who nonetheless go around to show their face and suffocate people with their stench of deception. By their umpteenth staging does nothing but give me the strength and awareness of the fight more than ever that the truth is that they intend to hide from all eyes.

For me in me the serenity and tranquility of mind ataraxia full right of those who does not flaunt quest'ingiusta pain, but because I trust in justice and right in the sense of the Italians, and finally I hope that sooner or later judges are aware of the strangeness of what my total was a horrible murder of a beautiful wonderful girl who was Meredith by Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox.

Rudy Guede

Yes, such colorful language, if a bit far-fetched. I mean, who calls a woman a small human angel? No one!

Oh wait. It will come to me. Maybe the same person who calls another woman an enchanting witch, Lucifer-like, demonic, satanic and diabolic?

 

[Ammonitida]

I'm still not entirely positive of what they decided on the bra clasp. As for the calumnia charge, its not extraditable. Knox is in the states. They are just wasting everyones money by continuing those charges. Italys tax payers are gonna front that bill because they will never see a dime. Patrick might get some of that money that knox won in italy from her lawsuit. Other than that, no one else will get any money(other than the lawyers). Mainly because US views slander differently. Is Maresca still working for free? Or are the Kerchers paying him now?

I'm confused about the bra clasp myself. Going over past discussions regarding the minor contributors, there was a repeated claim that the contributors were 'female'. There was even a guilter explanation for it -- that a washing machine contaminated the clasp with the DNA from the other female residents at the cottage. In the C&V report, however, they make mention of extra male contributors based on their reading a of the "Y-Filer". The Y-filer had alleles not in stutter position that were not reported by Stefonini. This led them to conclude that Sollecitio was not the only male contributor to the clasp. But in my reading I found nothing about these extra female contributors, except perhaps the reading of the "identifier" which also had extra alleles that were reported as stutters (the report disagreed with that). Did that come from the females? Or was the whole female claim just premature?

And what does this statement actually mean;

From Vecchiotti

After examining just the first 4 markers (over 17) of the Y chromosome, there were already new alleles for forming at least 8 profiles”! So she didn’t really continue to find the all of them.

Does that mean what I think it means -- that there were 8 minor male contributors to the bra clasp?

 

[Rolfe]

I have a crawling suspicion that the cops tried to contaminate the clasp with Sollecito's DNA, and Stefanoni knew that's what she was supposed to find. However, perhaps leery of overdoing it (which might have looked very suspicious), they screwed up and managed barely a trace, along with a lot of other bare traces.

But that of course is a vile calumny which I cannot substantiate. It's just a feeling I have.

Rolfe.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I have a crawling suspicion that the cops tried to contaminate the clasp with Sollecito's DNA, and Stefanoni knew that's what she was supposed to find. However, perhaps leery of overdoing it (which might have looked very suspicious), they screwed up and managed barely a trace, along with a lot of other bare traces.

But that of course is a vile calumny which I cannot substantiate. It's just a feeling I have.

Rolfe.

I think your intuitions about this - and other things - can be trusted.

 

[RoseMontague]

A bit more info on the Edmund Arapi case (the cook) here, from Fair Trials International, which is a group I was unfamiliar with and happy to find.

This article, dated June 2010, from another interesting looking group, Lawyers without Borders, indicates the real culprit is still at large.

Thank you icerat, a very informative article. Not very complimentary regarding the Italian system of justice.

 

[RoseMontague]

I'm confused about the bra clasp myself. Going over past discussions regarding the minor contributors, there was a repeated claim that the contributors were 'female'. There was even a guilter explanation for it -- that a washing machine contaminated the clasp with the DNA from the other female residents at the cottage. In the C&V report, however, they make mention of extra male contributors based on their reading a of the "Y-Filer". The Y-filer had alleles not in stutter position that were not reported by Stefonini. This led them to conclude that Sollecitio was not the only male contributor to the clasp. But in my reading I found nothing about these extra female contributors, except perhaps the reading of the "identifier" which also had extra alleles that were reported as stutters (the report disagreed with that). Did that come from the females? Or was the whole female claim just premature?

And what does this statement actually mean;

From Vecchiotti



Does that mean what I think it means -- that there were 8 minor male contributors to the bra clasp?

My reading of this is that Stefi hid these extra alleles that were not reported originally to the defense team, so they really had no clue. I don't know if this was part of the raw data they requested and received, but it was certainly something that was not provided until the judge told her to turn it over. Contrary to what Machiavelli alluded to this additional data was important in relation to this evidence and this was data that was not in the record.

[131] Subsequently, Dr. Stefanoni provided us with the electrophoretic graph (May 11, 2011 04:08 PM) of the same run but with the indications relative to the height and the areas of all the peaks present in the aforementioned graph.In light of the numerical values relative to the height of the peaks present in the electropherogram, we can make the following observations regarding the interpretation of the alleles performed by the Technical Consultant.Observation of the electropherogram shows that, besides the peaks indicated in the RTIGF as alleles, additional peaks exceeding the threshold of 50 RFU are present, which despite not being in stutter position were not taken into consideration by the Technical Consultant.