Continuation Part 4: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Chris_Halkides]

We're done here

You’re going to give me a lesson, oh please! Sorry, I will get back to you as soon as I can stop laughing!

I am tired of answering your questions with respect to Y-STR analysis and other matters without any reciprocity. Welcome to ignore.

 

[anglolawyer]

It is not a deflection at all. The simple truth is neither defence teams have publicly accused Mignini.

I do understand your difficulty in responding to simple questions, as ever I am happy for anyone to draw their own conclusions.

As you know Frank Sfarzo (Sforza) does have outstanding arrest warrants in the US and legal issues in Italy, if he ever returned to the US he would be arrested where as Mignini if he wished could travel to the US without fear of arrest.

These are formidable points Coulsdon! I am hardly surprised Halides cannot answer. It clearly follows that Sforzas relative preponderance over Mignini of legal difficulties in the US is poweful evidence of the propriety of the prosecution. Keep it up!

 

[CoulsdonUK]

These are formidable points Coulsdon! I am hardly surprised Halides cannot answer. It clearly follows that Sforzas relative preponderance over Mignini of legal difficulties in the US is poweful evidence of the propriety of the prosecution. Keep it up!

Please If possible provide the current status of any legal proceedings against Mignini in Florence.

Is Mignini like Raffaele and Amanda innocent until proven guilty or are you applying different legal rulings.

I mention Frank merely to expose how some treat an individual’s legal status differently.

I’ll ask you, if Mignini flew into any American airport would he be eligible for arrest?

If Frank flew into American airport would he be eligible for arrest?

 

[Grinder]

Has Mignini actually been charged within anything related to the Meredith Kercher case?

No. Very difficult to do in Italy.

Does Frank have any outstanding arrest warrants in the US?

Yes. One in Seattle for failure to appear on two misdemeanor domestic assaults (roommates) and $2500 bench warrant was issued.

Has Mignini been arrested for of the accusations against him?

Because of his position he wasn't arrested but was found guilty by the court of the first instance and then not guilty because of technicality. Charged in the wrong court.

Does Frank have any outstanding legal issues in Perugia?

Yes. It is the most hazy one as Frank says it was orchestrated by Mignini and PLE but the PGP say it was about Frank's family. Of course both could be true.

Coulsdon,
It seems to be very difficult to say anything about the PM in Italy that questions anything. The PGP made a big deal about the fact that Amanda's lawyers didn't make the case that she was hit during the interrogation. However when she, herself, stated that she had been cuffed and pressured she was sued by the police for saying so. Mignini did threaten Shay of the West Seattle Herald for publishing the characterization of Mignini by someone else, it was attributed.

Perhaps someone else remembers the detail but some of the defense lawyers were charged or threatened with charges.

The Italian system seems very flawed in this area. Defendants are allowed to lie but good faith arguments by defense lawyers can result in criminal charges.

 

[Grinder]

Please If possible provide the current status of any legal proceedings against Mignini in Florence.

Moved to another jurisdiction. Pending

Is Mignini like Raffaele and Amanda innocent until proven guilty or are you applying different legal rulings.

Depends on how you look at it. He was convicted and it was overturned on a technicality of venue. The only court to make a judgment found him guilty.

I’ll ask you, if Mignini flew into any American airport would he be eligible for arrest?

No. He has not been charged here. We don't charge people with crimes for saying something in another country.

If Frank flew into American airport would he be eligible for arrest?

It would be highly unlikely that he would be arrested outside of WA State for a misdemeanor.

 

[anglolawyer]

Please If possible provide the current status of any legal proceedings against Mignini in Florence.

Is Mignini like Raffaele and Amanda innocent until proven guilty or are you applying different legal rulings.

I mention Frank merely to expose how some treat an individual’s legal status differently.

I’ll ask you, if Mignini flew into any American airport would he be eligible for arrest?

If Frank flew into American airport would he be eligible for arrest?

The point you are making is puerile. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. So what? You are addicted to trite points.

You mean 'liable to arrest' btw. not 'eligible'. Frank is liable to be arrested in Washington state because he is charged there. Mignini isn't. Am I in as much trouble as Mignini is in Italy? No. He must be guilty then.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Panorama magazine

Perhaps someone else remembers the detail but some of the defense lawyers were charged or threatened with charges.

The Italian system seems very flawed in this area. Defendants are allowed to lie but good faith arguments by defense lawyers can result in criminal charges.

From the link I previously provided:
"6. Luciano Ghirga, an attorney for Amanda Knox.

7. Luca Maori, an attorney for Raffaele Sollecito

8. Giangavino Sulas, journalist for Oggi magazine

9. The director and editor of Oggi magazine"

From this link: "Giuttari and Mignini ordered the wiretapping and shadowing of two police officials from the press office of the Polizia in Rome, who had earlier asked Giuttari to limit his television appearances."

 

[Grinder]

Anglo,

It is hard enough to understand these kind of arguments in English much less ones translated from Italian to English.

My quick take is that Galati is saying that the court should look at all the connected evidence and see if as a package it points to probable involvement beyond a reasonable doubt, rather than inspecting each piece and saying they are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

For example, if the knife fit the bloody outline, the wounds was found discarded between the cottage and Raf's place and had Amanda's DNA on it and the same amount of Meredith's DNA as Stefanoni claimed that would make the knife solid evidence even if proper protocol wasn't followed.

For all of the other undocumented lawyers out there, this was a quick response and only an opinion based on the most credible information available tending to support that opinion

ETA - sorry Chris for not going to your link before posting. Do you remember what they were charged with?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

No. Very difficult to do in Italy.



Yes. One in Seattle for failure to appear on two misdemeanor domestic assaults (roommates) and $2500 bench warrant was issued.



Because of his position he wasn't arrested but was found guilty by the court of the first instance and then not guilty because of technicality. Charged in the wrong court.



Yes. It is the most hazy one as Frank says it was orchestrated by Mignini and PLE but the PGP say it was about Frank's family. Of course both could be true.

Coulsdon,
It seems to be very difficult to say anything about the PM in Italy that questions anything. The PGP made a big deal about the fact that Amanda's lawyers didn't make the case that she was hit during the interrogation. However when she, herself, stated that she had been cuffed and pressured she was sued by the police for saying so. Mignini did threaten Shay of the West Seattle Herald for publishing the characterization of Mignini by someone else, it was attributed.

Perhaps someone else remembers the detail but some of the defense lawyers were charged or threatened with charges.

The Italian system seems very flawed in this area. Defendants are allowed to lie but good faith arguments by defense lawyers can result in criminal charges.

Grinder

To be honest Frank is a mere sideshow and of little interest to me apart from the discomfort he causes in certain quarters (tick tick, boom).

As for Mignini my point here is that there is a difference between allegations and actual charges and as such he has not been charged with any wrong doing in relation to this case. For me it is not so much that it is difficult charging him more the simple fact that the judicial process is still active until the Supreme Court rule on the prosecutions appeal; in short there are a series of unproven allegations against Mignini.

Anyway, back to Galati’s appeal.

Halides1, thank you I am still chuckling.

 

[anglolawyer]

Anglo,

It is hard enough to understand these kind of arguments in English much less ones translated from Italian to English.

My quick take is that Galati is saying that the court should look at all the connected evidence and see if as a package it points to probable involvement beyond a reasonable doubt, rather than inspecting each piece and saying they are true beyond a reasonable doubt.
For example, if the knife fit the bloody outline, the wounds was found discarded between the cottage and Raf's place and had Amanda's DNA on it and the same amount of Meredith's DNA as Stefanoni claimed that would make the knife solid evidence even if proper protocol wasn't followed.

For all of the other undocumented lawyers out there, this was a quick response and only an opinion based on the most credible information available tending to support that opinion

ETA - sorry Chris for not going to your link before posting. Do you remember what they were charged with?

Yes, well, you have a knack with these things. What you say does seem to be what Galati is saying, but in his case dressed up in fancy robes. I wonder whether Italian jurisprudence is on a false path in trying to systemise some kind of philosophically correct way of considering evidence. I got interested in this when considering the jury instructions in the Scott Peterson case which were baffling and, in my opinion FWIW, in some respects unintelligible.

They got unintelligible around the part where they said that a fact essential to complete a set of circumstances must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, leaving me wondering what a set of circumstances looked like and what a fact which might complete them looked like. Anyway, that version of the instructions got chucked away and replaced by another, more intelligible set.

There is none of this in Galati. There, we have the law that says circumstantial evidence must be serious, consistent etc but nothing at all about coming in sets. Nor is there anything in the Californian variant about inverse relationships, gravity measured by logical connections etc.

Now, in English law, things are much simpler than in California or Italy. I have never heard a jury given a philosophical lecture about these things. As they sit there with their pitchforks and clogs, munching straw, they are directed to weigh the whole of the evidence and find the facts. The judge rehashes the evidence, inserting a lot of 'you may thinks' and 'you may be disposed to believes' and always finishes up saying 'it is a matter for you, members of the jury'.

The thing is, all these courts are doing the same thing. Funny ain't it? How can it be simple in England, more complicated in California and off the scale in Italy when it's the same thing?

 

[Bill Williams]

You mean 'liable to arrest' btw. not 'eligible'. Frank is liable to be arrested in Washington state because he is charged there. Mignini isn't. Am I in as much trouble as Mignini is in Italy? No. He must be guilty then.

There is what I know as a "bench warrant" for Frank in Washington State. He flew back to Seattle on Dec 30 so as to attend court on the 31st as directed at his Nov release. He was denied entry by Homeland Security for unspecified reasons. Homeland Security was aware that he was needed in court the following day and the court was aware that he was turned around at immigration.

Since he has shown good faith towards the court, I doubt he'd be arrested upon reentry. If there was a new hearing date set by the Washington court (which to my knowledge there is not one yet set) and if he did not attend that, then he'd be in violation of the bench warrant and more than likely liable to arrest. But that would be a strange issue, because if he was being held by Homeland Security (US federal) but needed in a Washington court (State) it would be an issue of jurisdiction.... and would play in Frank's favour.

I agree with CoulsdonUK - this whole thing as discussed by third parties is a complete sideshow. However I disagree that Frank is a liability to the main issues we talk about here. And will never be.

Does he cause "discomfort"? Is the Pope Catholic?

 

[Grinder]

There is what I know as a "bench warrant" for Frank in Washington State. He flew back to Seattle on Dec 30 so as to attend court on the 31st as directed at his Nov release. He was denied entry by Homeland Security for unspecified reasons. Homeland Security was aware that he was needed in court the following day and the court was aware that he was turned around at immigration.

It was reported that he was detained by customs in NY, which doesn't make sense. There was a morning hearing and in the afternoon when he didn't show a bench warrant was issued. A bench warrant is an arrest warrant, period. If he was in Seattle trying to clear customs or immigration or now Homeland Security, his lawyer would only have needed to point that out with some proof and the hearing would have been delayed. That's not what happened.

Since he has shown good faith towards the court, I doubt he'd be arrested upon reentry. If there was a new hearing date set by the Washington court (which to my knowledge there is not one yet set) and if he did not attend that, then he'd be in violation of the bench warrant and more than likely liable to arrest. But that would be a strange issue, because if he was being held by Homeland Security (US federal) but needed in a Washington court (State) it would be an issue of jurisdiction.... and would play in Frank's favour.

Not making an appearance is not showing good faith. A public defender made her appearance, which gives Frank no credit. He won't be arrested in NY because it's a misdemeanor but if he flew into Sea-Tac he might be. Are you saying that Frank is posting from federal detainment?
No date will be set until he makes an appearance or his lawyer arranging it. A bench warrant is an arrest warrant He is in violation of the court now because he didn't appear and didn't have an acceptable excuse.

I agree with CoulsdonUK - this whole thing as discussed by third parties is a complete sideshow. However I disagree that Frank is a liability to the main issues we talk about here. And will never be.

There are more than third party discussions. There are court records that can be read online from Hawaii and Seattle. I don't know how to access the Italian system but I believe there are records there as well. Frank actions are a liability to certain accusations against Mignini and to certain authors that used him as a primary source.

 

[Grinder]

I wonder whether Italian jurisprudence is on a false path in trying to systemise some kind of philosophically correct way of considering evidence.

Yes that was I got from trying to read Galati. It seemed he was saying that the law prescribed how to evaluate evidence.

 

[anglolawyer]

Yes that was I got from trying to read Galati. It seemed he was saying that the law prescribed how to evaluate evidence.

Instinctively, it sounds like bull, but some clever people have evidently devoted a lot of time and thought to the exercise. So it's worth trying to grapple with it.

 

[Grinder]

Grinder

To be honest Frank is a mere sideshow and of little interest to me apart from the discomfort he causes in certain quarters (tick tick, boom).

Basically agree

As for Mignini my point here is that there is a difference between allegations and actual charges and as such he has not been charged with any wrong doing in relation to this case. For me it is not so much that it is difficult charging him more the simple fact that the judicial process is still active until the Supreme Court rule on the prosecutions appeal; in short there are a series of unproven allegations against Mignini.

Yes, of course, there is a difference between allegations and actual charges. The problem is if the Italian system is as corrupt as it seems, his not getting charged doesn't say that much. Mignini has been charged and convicted in two cases in the first instance. As I said earlier he was never found not guilty by a court - I think I said that wrong upthread.

Another problem is that his role should have ended with the first trial but he wedged his way into the appeal. I have no idea who would charge him anyway, do you?

 

[Bill Williams]

It was reported that he was detained by customs in NY, which doesn't make sense.

It was Seattle.

There was a morning hearing and in the afternoon when he didn't show a bench warrant was issued. A bench warrant is an arrest warrant, period.

All technically true. Court's show wide discretion though depending on circumstance.

If he was in Seattle trying to clear customs or immigration or now Homeland Security, his lawyer would only have needed to point that out with some proof and the hearing would have been delayed. That's not what happened.

That's exactly what happened. It was delayed to some unknown date when the lawyer could tell the court when he'd be back in the country.

Not making an appearance is not showing good faith. A public defender made her appearance, which gives Frank no credit. He won't be arrested in NY because it's a misdemeanor but if he flew into Sea-Tac he might be. Are you saying that Frank is posting from federal detainment?

Not making an appearance for good reason sits well with any court. But it is as you say, the mechanism set in place is the same regardless. The truth is the judge was well aware of the circumstance and acted accordingly.

No date will be set until he makes an appearance or his lawyer arranging it. A bench warrant is an arrest warrant He is in violation of the court now because he didn't appear and didn't have an acceptable excuse.

Well, you can have that opinion if you wish. The truth is already part of the court record, and since the judge had no jurisdiction over Homeland Security, even the judge had to bow to the inevitable. The judge is well aware of the circumstance; so it matters little what you and I post to a board somewhere.

There are more than third party discussions. There are court records that can be read online from Hawaii and Seattle. I don't know how to access the Italian system but I believe there are records there as well. Frank actions are a liability to certain accusations against Mignini and to certain authors that used him as a primary source.

They are a liability only in the sense that many are trying their hardest to make the connections. These are folks who went into this wanting to minimize or conspiratorialize Frank anyway. Nothing has changed really.

 

[Grinder]

It was Seattle.

No it was NYC. If he were in Seattle why hasn't the case moved forward?

All technically true. Court's show wide discretion though depending on circumstance.

Bill not technically true just plain true. There is a warrant for his arrest, period. The court allowed him to show in the afternoon but that was the end of it.

That's exactly what happened. It was delayed to some unknown date when the lawyer could tell the court when he'd be back in the country.

No Bill, go to http://web1.seattle.gov/courts/cpi/ and put in Sforca under defendant last name go to events and you will see no future court date is set nor was there any comment on the lawyer telling when he'd be back.

Not making an appearance for good reason sits well with any court. But it is as you say, the mechanism set in place is the same regardless. The truth is the judge was well aware of the circumstance and acted accordingly.

Dear me it's hard to hold my tongue here. There was an arrest warrant issued. That is the harshest option open to the court. Had Judge Mckenna accepted that Frank was being detained in Seattle by Homeland Security he would have facilitated his release into the court's control i.e. jail. Do you really think that King5 wouldn't have reported that Frank was being detained by HS.

They are a liability only in the sense that many are trying their hardest to make the connections. These are folks who went into this wanting to minimize or conspiratorialize Frank anyway. Nothing has changed really.

Wow.

 

[Bill Williams]

No it was NYC. If he were in Seattle why hasn't the case moved forward?



Bill not technically true just plain true. There is a warrant for his arrest, period. The court allowed him to show in the afternoon but that was the end of it.



No Bill, go to http://web1.seattle.gov/courts/cpi/ and put in Sforca under defendant last name go to events and you will see no future court date is set nor was there any comment on the lawyer telling when he'd be back.



Dear me it's hard to hold my tongue here. There was an arrest warrant issued. That is the harshest option open to the court. Had Judge Mckenna accepted that Frank was being detained in Seattle by Homeland Security he would have facilitated his release into the court's control i.e. jail. Do you really think that King5 wouldn't have reported that Frank was being detained by HS.



Wow.

Grinder - you win. I concede everything. Even point #3 that shows we agree. You win that one too.

 

[Bill Williams]

Damn, though, with Grinder winning these arguments, someone is going to have to rename Seattle to "New York City." He sure can win arguments.

Someone also has to alter the transcript of the court hearing, both the morning one and the afternoon one. The judge is in contempt of self for claiming that Frank was out at the airport in.... er, the New New York City, so as to distinguish it from the New York City on the east coast.

But Grinder, don't worry. This does not effect you winning.

 

[Mary_H]

Dear me it's hard to hold my tongue here. There was an arrest warrant issued. That is the harshest option open to the court. Had Judge Mckenna accepted that Frank was being detained in Seattle by Homeland Security he would have facilitated his release into the court's control i.e. jail. Do you really think that King5 wouldn't have reported that Frank was being detained by HS.

A bench warrant is not harsh; it's standard procedure for not showing up. If the judge wanted it to be harsh, he could have increased the bail amount. The only effect the bench warrant has is that if Frank returns to Seattle through Homeland Security, he has a choice of paying the bail or going to jail until the next hearing. No one will ever take the initiative to look for him or arrest him. DV IV is a very minor charge and Frank has no previous conviction record.

The judge did accept that the defendant was detained by Homeland Security, but no information was available about where he was being held. Also, as Bill said, the judge has no jurisdiction over Homeland Security. Even if the judge cared enough to get the defendant into court (he didn't) the chances he would have been able to persuade Homeland Security to release him were remote.

I doubt a day goes by that a defendant doesn't show up for a hearing. The important defendants are waiting for their hearings in jail; the court gets around to the other defendants as they present themselves, imposing penalties along the way.

Frank is not a big story for King 5. They didn't even stay for the afternoon hearing, and it is doubtful the story about Frank being in court would have made the news. ETA: The number of news organizations that were contacted versus the number that showed up should tell you about the level of interest in the story.