Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[smkovalinksy]

An interesting article about an Italian judge posted on IIP.

http://www.ilgiornale.it/interni/e_...-09-2011/articolo-id=546387-page=0-comments=1

Wow, thanks for that. VERY interesting. He decided to tear off his gown and take his pension, rather than continue on with the idiotic system. Here is a gem:

Mori admits that he had pulled a sigh of relief the day on which we have resigned: "The police system, treatment of the accused and the relationship between prosecutors and courts are still stuck in 1930. The police consider all suspected criminals, citizens are treated like pieces of feet, often questioning degenerate into violence. The prosecutor played the Commissioner and do not bother to secure the rights dell'inquisito. And the investigating magistrate thinks it his duty to support the action of the prosecutor. "

 

[LondonJohn]

An interesting article about an Italian judge posted on IIP.

http://www.ilgiornale.it/interni/e_...-09-2011/articolo-id=546387-page=0-comments=1

Somebody should direct this article towards many of the pro-guilt commentators who believe all is well in the Italian criminal justice system (chief amongst whom is the bizarre and unhinged Quennell, who often comes across like a weird poster child for Italian justice).

I think that the following excerpt from the article has particular resonance:

Mori admits that he had breathed a sigh of relief the day he resigned: "The police system, treatment of the accused and the relationship between prosecutors and courts are still stuck in 1930. The police consider all suspects as criminals, citizens are treated like pieces of dirt, often interrogations degenerate into violence. The PM acts like a Commissioner and does not bother to secure the rights of the person under investigation. And the GIP judge thinks it his duty to support the action of the PM."

It's amazing that virtually every one of these systemic imperfections form part of what went so wrong in the investigation/prosecution of Knox and Sollecito. Full marks to Mori for speaking out so vehemently and accurately. I've said it before: no system of criminal justice can ever be perfect, and there are inbuilt imperfections in every country's system. But I think it's pretty clear that Italy's criminal justice system has fundamental problems, most of which can be traced directly back to the fascist criminal codes drawn up in the 1930s under Mussolini. The fact that the criminal justice system required continuity after WW2 meant that Italians couldn't just tear up the fascist codes and replace them wholesale with new legislation and codification. Unfortunately, what's resulted is a strange and unworkable hybrid which contains clear relics of the fascist statutes that would be considered unlawful and contrary to basic human rights in most other modern democracies.

If the case of Knox and Sollecito has any impact beyond its damaging effects on Knox, Sollecito, their families/friends and Meredith's family, I hope that it will draw national and international attention to the widescale problems with the codification, administration and application of criminal justice in Italy. Articles such as this will hopefully add fuel to the fire of reform.

 

[LondonJohn]

Wow, thanks for that. VERY interesting. He decided to tear off his gown and take his pension, rather than continue on with the idiotic system. Here is a gem:

SNAP!

(Except my translation is better than the machine's )

 

[Rolfe]

Do the US immigration authorities really refuse to let anyone into the country as a tourist if they've ever been arrested, for any reason at all? One of the PMFers seems to think that's the case, so if Raffaele ever wanted to visit Amanda he couldn't.

I have my doubts about that, but not being American, and not having tried to get into the country after being arrested on a trumped-up charge, cannot say.

Rolfe.

 

[LondonJohn]

Very thoughtful and well-written new article from Steve Moore:

http://gmancasefile.blogspot.com/2011/11/jonas-salk-and-other-insensitive.html

I have to admit that while I did not appreciate some of his initial hyperbole about this case, I think that his recent writings have been precise, concise, articulate, and right on the money.

 

[LondonJohn]

Do the US immigration authorities really refuse to let anyone into the country as a tourist if they've ever been arrested, for any reason at all? One of the PMFers seems to think that's the case, so if Raffaele ever wanted to visit Amanda he couldn't.

I have my doubts about that, but not being American, and not having tried to get into the country after being arrested on a trumped-up charge, cannot say.

Rolfe.

No, it's not the case at all. Sollecito currently has no criminal conviction, so he is completely free to enter the US freely as a tourist under the visa waiver programme between the US and the EU*. Even criminal convictions are no automatic bar to entry under a tourist visa, but in nearly all instances a convicted person cannot use the visa waiver programme: instead, they have to apply for a visa, and attend an interview at a US Embassy or Consulate. Certain crimes (including murder) would almost certainly result in a refusal to issue a visa, but convictions for more minor offences such as driving without insurance or minor fraud would likely not cause a problem with visa issuance - especially if the convictions happened some time in the past.

I'm afraid that, as so often, many of the pro-guilt commentators are letting their blinkered hatred reinforce their ignorance, to give them the answer they want to hear. And, as so often, they are totally wrong.


* In fact, having just checked out of interest, the visa waiver programme actually excludes anyone arrested for any crime - regardless of whether or not they were convicted! But this simply means that somebody who's been arrested (but not convicted) would have to go through the process of applying for a visa. It is inconceivable that someone arrested but not convicted for offences that were not related to terrorism or matters of national security would be denied a tourist visa. I am 100% certain that Sollecito would have no trouble whatsoever entering the US as a tourist on a 90-day visa - it's just that under the current draconian US regulations he would be forced to apply for a visa and attend an interview at his closest US Consulate.

 

[Rolfe]

There's certainly some industrial-strength hatred going on there.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?style=1&f=1&t=428&start=1700#p107470

Self-absorbed as ever, Knox always finds a way to manipulate people, (parents included) in order to get what SHE wants. She's utterly oblivious to the emotional and financial debt the family has incurred because of her actions.

Amanda owes her family, big time.

But I'm sure she's playing the "pity card," milking it for all it's worth, in order to do her own thing. I think all she wants to do is resume the kind of life she had in Perugia, before November 1, 2007. She wants her life back--the one she had before Meredith's murder interfered with her self-obsessed life.

Free to come and go as she pleases. Bring back that old dolce vita, sex, some "smoke and mirrors"....(and by smoke and mirrors, I mean pot and cocaine.)

"I suffered, I was a victim, I was robbed of four years of my life." "I had to clean my cell and cook all my meals in prison, so I'M ENTITLED to do what I want now!!!!

I think the Melloxes can expect to hear this refrain over and over again through the years...
"ME ME ME ME ME...."

I don't understand what motivates people like that. On a brighter note, one of them reports having had a couple of comments on a Daily Fail article removed, apparently because the paper had received a large number of complaints about them.

ETA: This just appeared, without a hint of irony.

I like the elegant and intelligent way PMF has handled itself. Let's not devolve into a common site; this place is special.

Rolfe.

 

[LondonJohn]

And the rationalisation continues over at the trainwreck that is .org. This time, one of their "finest legal minds" has weighed in with a blinkered and ignorant attempt to suggest that Hellmann ruled that Knox/Sollecito were acquitted of the main charges - including murder - on grounds of reasonable doubt. Now, this "fine legal mind" has obviously either not even seen the reading of the verdict, or he has decided to ignore what was said, or he has not bothered to find out an English translation of what was said.

So, to help him (and any other biased or ignorant souls out there, regardless of their claimed legal training), here is a translation of what Hellmann actually said in the courtroom on October 3rd (my bolding):

“The court absolves both defendants of the crimes ascribed to them, A, B, C and D for not committing the crime and E because the crime did not happen."

So while Hellmann indeed ruled that the acquittals on charge E (the staging) were because there was no staging (i.e. in the court's view the break-in was real), he explicitly stated that the acquittals on charges A, B, C and D (the murder, the sexual elements of the murder, the thefts and the transportation of the knife) were on the grounds that the accused had not committed the acts ("per non avere commesso il fatto"). This is not reasonable doubt. This is to say that there was NO EVIDENCE AT ALL pointing towards the guilt of Knox and Sollecito on these charges.

I really do wonder about the so-called legal credentials of some of these characters sometimes. If they really are who they claim to be, I certainly hope that nobody I know ever has any of these people representing them in any legal matters.

 

[LondonJohn]

There's certainly some industrial-strength hatred going on there.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?style=1&f=1&t=428&start=1700#p107470




I don't understand what motivates people like that. On a brighter note, one of them reports having had a couple of comments on a Daily Fail article removed, apparently because the paper had received a large number of complaints about them.

Rolfe.

I seriously think that this character going under the moniker "The 411" needs psychiatric help. I'm not being flippant.

 

[Rolfe]

That's the problem with a forum that's nothing but an echo-chamber and mutual admiration society. When anyone who expresses even the slightest doubt about guilt is deemed to be a nasty disruptive person and banned on sight. (I was interested to see capealadin demand, over there, that Rose be banned immediately because he didn't even like to post on a forum where she was permitted to contribute. I wonder if that means he won't be back here?)

They refuse to consider any point of view but their own, and it becomes a vicious circle. Any far-fetched suggestion that supports that point of view is promptly hailed by others as a great insight, and adopted as self-evident truth. I was particularly struck by this phenomenon as regards the criticism of C&V's reference list. One person decided it was a fudge, and everyone else lined up to agree. They even got Thoughtful, who had been taking a rational view of the report, to fall into line.

I think they're going to get a nasty shock when the motivations report comes out.

Rolfe.

 

[lane99]

My money's always been on Col. Mustard

Lane, this is interesting, because when I saw the lottery episode, I could see that was rubbish.
With the false confession episode, I thought that he was, in a fairly subtle way, implanting the notion that the set-up was fake. Professor Plum in the library with a candle-stick, anyone?

Could be. That's certainly his style.

In the "experiment" he did with an undertaker a few years back, at the end he blurts out: "that was out of this world!" The unwary viewer will naturally take this to be nothing more than an exclamation of his amazement at an incredible denouement.

But actually it's a very witty allusion (which only those with a knowledge of magic techniques and methods will be able to catch) to the secret method he used to accomplish the effect.

 

[Dougm]

It's kind of a dwindling list of posters over on the PMFs, is it not? Seems like some already dropped off after the latest verdict contradicted all of the predictions over there ...

 

[LondonJohn]

Could be. That's certainly his style.

In the "experiment" he did with an undertaker a few years back, at the end he blurts out: "that was out of this world!" The unwary viewer will naturally take this to be nothing more than an exclamation of his amazement at an incredible denouement.

But actually it's a very witty allusion (which only those with a knowledge of magic techniques and methods will be able to catch) to the secret method he used to accomplish the effect.

Indeed. "Out of this world" is a standard method/effect that's part of most card magicians' repertoires, and Brown was merely using a stylised version of the effect in the Undertaker routine. But again I would assert that Brown draws a clear and well-articulated line between his illusion/deception work and his investigation/exposition work. I am highly confident that the outcomes in his "The Experiments" shows were real and involved no instances of audience deception, secret (and hidden) techniques, or clever editing/visual tricks.

 

[Diocletus]

Leaking Leakers

This is from Perugia Shock:

"Other things came out in court. The witness Alessandra Formica, for instance, probably didn’t tell us who killed Meredith. But she told us, for what a journalist told her, who was leaking minutes of the investigation to the journalists. Maybe the prosecutor didn’t hear it that day, let’s say like this. So, let’s remind him. Has he to investigate the cop for revealing secret of office or the witness for slander?"

I believe that I read somewhere else that Napoleoni was the leaker. Does anyone know what was leaked, and also, does anyone have access to Formica's testimony concerning the leak to the journalist?

 

[Osterwelle]

ETA: This just appeared, without a hint of irony.

I like the elegant and intelligent way PMF has handled itself. Let's not devolve into a common site; this place is special.

Rolfe.

This springs to mind:

-
Osterwelle

 

[smkovalinksy]

There's certainly some industrial-strength hatred going on there.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?style=1&f=1&t=428&start=1700#p107470




I don't understand what motivates people like that. On a brighter note, one of them reports having had a couple of comments on a Daily Fail article removed, apparently because the paper had received a large number of complaints about them.

ETA: This just appeared, without a hint of irony.






Rolfe.

I had noticed this as well. Psychoanalysing Amanda, a person whom they have never known, never met: Saying she is a narcissist, she is a sociopath, she is using Curt, she is using Madison Paxton: Her sisters are a burden to her, etc. etc. etc. She blames Meredith for egging her on to kill her.... Where is the proof of these assertions? How can they speak without evidence, without respect for the appellate judge and jurists? Who gave them license to be armchair diagnosticians???

 

[pilot padron]

Fer' sure, fer' sure

Very thoughtful and well-written new article from Steve Moore:

http://gmancasefile.blogspot.com/2011/11/jonas-salk-and-other-insensitive.html

I have to admit that while I did not appreciate some of his initial hyperbole about this case, I think that his recent writings have been precise, concise, articulate, and right on the money.

This quote from the article you cite is, I suppose, a prime example of very "precise, concise, articulate and right on the money" writing about the case.

"One of the greatest examples of this type of self-serving, short-sighted insensitivity was, of course, that selfish bastard Jonas Salk. A polio vaccine?! Are you kidding me? A vaccine for (rich) people who don’t even HAVE the disease?"

Not an iota of Moore's previous perverse penchant for hyperbole in that.
No Sir.

PS:
Google or even Wikipedia will not substantiate Moore's strange exaggerations (hyperbole) and unnecessary slurs (hyperbole) toward Dr Salk in making his latest case for innocence of Knox.

 

[smkovalinksy]

This springs to mind:

[qimg]http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6816/specialdemot.jpg[/qimg]

-
Osterwelle

Right. In this case, their "specialness" consists of being hard-headed, blind to new information, obsessive, fanatical, delusional, condescending, petty, and downright pernicious.

 

[smkovalinksy]

This quote from the article you cite is, I suppose, a prime example of very "precise, concise, articulate and right on the money" writing about the case.

"One of the greatest examples of this type of self-serving, short-sighted insensitivity was, of course, that selfish bastard Jonas Salk. A polio vaccine?! Are you kidding me? A vaccine for (rich) people who don’t even HAVE the disease?"

Not an iota of Moore's previous perverse penchant for hyperbole in that.
No Sir.

PS:
Google or even Wikipedia will not substantiate Moore's strange exaggerations (hyperbole) and unnecessary slurs (hyperbole) toward Dr Salk in making his latest case for innocence of Knox.

He has a strange writing style. But then, he was an FBI agent, and not a writer. He is trying to make a point via hyperbole. Not the way a natural writer would do so. So he needs an editor. But he is still on the mark.

 

[Dougm]

This quote from the article you cite is, I suppose, a prime example of very "precise, concise, articulate and right on the money" writing about the case.

"One of the greatest examples of this type of self-serving, short-sighted insensitivity was, of course, that selfish bastard Jonas Salk. A polio vaccine?! Are you kidding me? A vaccine for (rich) people who don’t even HAVE the disease?"

Not an iota of Moore's previous perverse penchant for hyperbole in that.
No Sir.

PS:
Google or even Wikipedia will not substantiate Moore's strange exaggerations (hyperbole) and unnecessary slurs (hyperbole) toward Dr Salk in making his latest case for innocence of Knox.

I read the hyperbole as sarcasm. He is trying to show how rediculous it sounds if someone where to give comparable criticism to Salk.

He should have used some eye rolling emoticons!!