Amanda's calunnia conviction will be appealed and ---contrary to earlier reports---the Hellman court's acquittal of Amanda and Raffaele for murder was
unanimous. Raffaele has already spoken. A statement from Amanda is expected shortly.
HERE.
///
Well, well, well. Hellmann's report jibes* with our analysis extraordinarily highly. His court determined that the break in was likely real, that the partial print on the bathmat was likely Guede's (contrary to those risible and pseudoscientific "millimetre accuracy" measurements hehe), that the totality of the forensic evidence was fundamentally flawed, that Curatolo was a shambling wreck of a "superwitness", that Quintavalle, Capezzali, Monacchia and Formica were all thoroughly unreliable, and that the ToD was before 10.30pm.
This is what anyone with a rational, objective, scientific, sceptical approach has known for a very long time now. It's only those with a bizarre agenda and a deeply invested position who have stuck to the thoroughly ludicrous (and now totally discredited) Mignini-Massei position. They might like to note with interest Hellmann's/Zanetti's explicit condemnation of Massei's appalling "reasoning" - something that we rational thinkers have also been pointing out for a very long time.
I still think that the criminal slander verdict is eminently appealable, and I hope that Knox does lodge an appeal. It will be interesting to see whether the prosecutors appeal the acquittals: Mignini and Comodi remain full of piss and vinegar, but it's not their decision to take. We'll see......
Oh and by the way, just to correct others elsewhere who don't know some aspects of this case as well as they think they do, Knox's erstwhile cellmate, Angela Biriukova (a.k.a. "The Black Widow") was
not convicted in the first trial, acquitted on appeal, then "re-convicted" by the Supreme Court. Instead, she was acquitted in the first trial, then convicted in the appeal, and this appeal conviction was confirmed by the Supreme Court. But never let the facts get in the way of a good story though, eh?!
Sorry, pro-guilt commentators. It's truly over. I have doubts that more circumspect senior prosecutors will even launch a Supreme Court appeal over the acquittals. But if they do appeal, they'll lose. They have no grounds whatsoever, and no case. Conversely, I think that Knox stands a very good chance of successfully appealing the criminal slander verdict - for reasons that have been articulated here before. Whether she has the stomach for a re-trial at the appeal stage of this charge is debatable though - she may just want the whole thing to end, and to get on with her life.
Oh, and by the way, some people still seem to have no idea about the difference between free speech and defamation. Would it be "free speech", for example, if I were to publicly state that (insert living former US president of your choice here) had raped and killed a Puerto Rican immigrant fourteen year old while in office? Do you think that I could claim a free speech defence in court? The same applies (albeit slightly less sensationally) to referring to Amanda Knox as a "murderer" post the Hellmann verdict. Again, whether she or her lawyers have the inclination to pursue sad internet nobodies is debatable, but people should be in absolutely no doubt that since October 3rd 2011, this is a potentially defamatory statement. But good luck with your bogus "free speech" argument
* Small intra-forum joke there, related to another thread
I says "case closed" as well; the prosecutorial appeal will not abide.
