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

[Grinder]

Once I was in there, they asked me to repeat everything that I had said before, for instance what I did that night. They asked me to see my phone, which I gave to them, and they were looking through my phone, which is when they found the message. When they found the message, they asked me if I had sent a message back, which I didn't remember doing. That's when they started being very hard with me. They called me a stupid liar, and they said that I was trying to protect someone.

In her recounting of the evening she had mentioned the text from PL as it would have been key to her not working. The message found was the outgoing. She isn't very articulate generally. One would certainly think she would be more specific about a missing message. She could have said "they showed me the message from PL, which later was missing and they used against me in the first hearing."

ETA - where is the reporter located now?

 

[anglolawyer]

Once I was in there, they asked me to repeat everything that I had said before, for instance what I did that night. They asked me to see my phone, which I gave to them, and they were looking through my phone, which is when they found the message. When they found the message, they asked me if I had sent a message back, which I didn't remember doing. That's when they started being very hard with me. They called me a stupid liar, and they said that I was trying to protect someone.

In her recounting of the evening she had mentioned the text from PL as it would have been key to her not working. The message found was the outgoing. She isn't very articulate generally. One would certainly think she would be more specific about a missing message. She could have said "they showed me the message from PL, which later was missing and they used against me in the first hearing."

Like I said before, I am done with this topic here. I have posted everything at Ground Report if anyone wants to take a look.

 

[anglolawyer]

ETA - where is the reporter located now?

Beijing

 

[Grinder]

The OP case has brought an interesting exchange highlighting both the denseness of the PGP and hypocrisy.

I just saw a quote from OP's family, who expressed what I think would have been nice to hear from Knox's family. Oscar Pistorius' older brother Carl said he is "praying unceasingly for Reeva's family", and his uncles expressed the sentiment that although the court appearances had been difficult, their thoughts were with Reeva's family at this time.
Simple. Gracious. Humane. Decent.

I think it speaks volumes about the differences between the two families.

This is of course an attack against the families of A and R. Missing for this PGP is the fact that OP admits to killing Reeva. I think that the families could have done a better job of showing sympathy, but clearly with your children falsely accused the picture is quite different.

Now we move to the height of hypocrisy. Another member of the PGP pipes up making it clear that no matter what the families had done there was no doing right.

Do you think his words are heartfelt and genuine or could they have been suggested by the PR consultant Stuart Higgins?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

my memory is not quite certain

but it seems to me that JREF member michellesings once said that she was praying for the Kercher family and that this was met with scorn from some PG individuals. I have never heard the Knox or Mellas families say anything bad about the Kercher family, despite attempts to twist their words with pipe wrenches.

 

[Grinder]

but it seems to me that JREF member michellesings once said that she was praying for the Kercher family and that this was met with scorn from some PG individuals. I have never heard the Knox or Mellas families say anything bad about the Kercher family, despite attempts to twist their words with pipe wrenches.

You are probably correct, I don't remember. The example I gave just highlights their lack of honesty. It is same with Amanda not recanting about PL. Not withstanding the notes particularly what we know of the 7th, had Amanda written a note at any time before Lumumba was released the PGP would have ******* themselves screaming the only way she could know he was innocent was if she was there. I can hear the bingos out of a certain alleged attorney. Any PGP member not towing the line would be chastised by the non-human one as being ignorant and a list of past cases would come streaming out.

Not a one of them has ever addressed the De Felice buckled comments. They spend all their energy in this area talking about tea and cakes.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

fluorescein method of presumptive blood testing

As noted at this link, "Both Fluorescein and Luminol can react to bleach, cleansers, cleaning materials, human and animal urine (which may not contain blood), certain types of metals (iron and copper), and/or any strong oxidizers [14]." Reference 14 is: Cheeseman R, DiMeo LA. Fluorescein as a field-worthy latent bloodstain detection system. J Forensic Ident 1995;45(6):631-46.

The author also wrote, "For example, small amounts of blood is expected to be found in bathrooms and in kitchens, but blood found in kitchens may not always be human blood; or positives reactions may be found on carpeted areas from animal or human urine."

 

[RandyN]

The OP case has brought an interesting exchange highlighting both the denseness of the PGP and hypocrisy.



This is of course an attack against the families of A and R. Missing for this PGP is the fact that OP admits to killing Reeva. I think that the families could have done a better job of showing sympathy, but clearly with your children falsely accused the picture is quite different.

Now we move to the height of hypocrisy. Another member of the PGP pipes up making it clear that no matter what the families had done there was no doing right.

Apples and Oranges.

OP killed the beauty...no question. He even admits it. How can you say anything except sorry?

AK and RS were wrongly accused and the prosecutor used lies and deception to get them tossed into jail for a year without charge. They were denied bail even though nothing in either of their pasts indicated any arrests or violent activities. Later the prosecutor took extreme measures (filing charges against the family) to stop them from speaking about the case at all. No one questions that the prosecutor was using unfair and illegal pressures to deny the defendants a fair trial. All this while the on going shark fest of tabloid reporters was being chummed in by the prosecutors and the police officials.

When exactly did the Knox/Mellas family have a chance to express their sympathy? They certainly expressed sympathies at least as strongly as OP family did. But so far RS (Renna) family has not set out the shark like component to Maresca.

Sorry but I dont think it is fair to compare these stories. I could rip up the behavior of the Kercher family leaking well timed family statements designed to interfere with a fair trial...sure it was the work of Maresca but he supposedly worked at their behest.

But we gave them wide latitude because they lost a loved one. The fact is they never gave an indication of anything except that AK and RS were somehow also guilty. And losing a loved one is never assuaged by making a ridiculous case against clearly innocent persons.

Now the court has found both accused to be innocent. Have the Kerchers apologized for fighting so hard to wrongly convict them? No. In fact if you look closer they have doubled down and are raising funds now to continue the wrongful conviction.

I have heard both Kurt and Edda on different interviews express great sympathy for the Kerchers...this while being forced to undergo the relentless media frenzy, the false stories, images, lies, and even the direct threats of the prosecutor who by charging them was saying....shut up or you will never see your daughter again!

A prosecution with the moral authority of the mafia. Same rules, same tactics. Dirty rotten liars.

Anglo seems to hold SA justice in low regard. I challenge him to review the European Court Of Human Rights violations charged against Italy. Worst...or maybe a tie with Turkey...they should be proud.

John Kercher owes the families of the wrongly accused an apology. So does Stephanie Kercher. Sure they lost a loved one...but what excuse do they have for making her murder worse by ruining two innocent persons lives? None that I can see.

 

[anglolawyer]

A comparative study of Italian and South African law enforcement would be interesting. If it worked as intended the Italian system would have a lot going for it but, from what we've seen here and in the astonishing Scazzi case and others, theory and practise seem to diverge widely. I don't really know enough about either society but maybe they both exhibit stress due to overwhelming pressure from organised crime and corruption in Italy and very high crime rates and deprivation in SA. Maybe no system can tolerate extreme levels of stress without being corrupted in some way.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

If the shoe doesn't fit

I dont think enough can be said about the fact that Mignini ...after getting his pal Matteni to hold the three in custody without charge for up to a year if necessary... then took that whole year leaking and building and tossing and refining as he saw fit. It was comical at some points...ridiculous at others and just plain corrupt at others...as in charging the parents, the defendant into submission. Making the defense lawyers sit like muted statues almost. Certainly during the first trial. I don't think they objected to Lumumbas case running along with the regular case even when they understood that "fully that banned by the SC data" would enter into the trial. A total violation of the right to a fair trial the mandates watched over carefully by the European Court Of Human Rights. And to which Italy has the most violations of any country...btw...far more violations than places like Russia! They are running neck and neck with Turkey IIRC.

Benjamin Sayagh wrote a good manuscript about why keeping Amanda in custody was wrong, given that there were other options for someone who could reasonably be considered a flight risk. However, Raffaele could not reasonably be considered a flight risk and yet he was also subjected to precautionary detention. Moreover, he was kept in solitary for about six months IIRC. The only evidence against him at that point were shoe prints that even members of the Sollecito family (without any special training) could see did not match his shoes. I agree that the Italian system has some elements that are worthy of emulation, yet something in the system is seriously out of kilter when one considers the unjustness of the events prior to the trial.

 

[Grinder]

Benjamin Sayagh wrote a good manuscript about why keeping Amanda in custody was wrong, given that there were other options for someone who could reasonably be considered a flight risk. However, Raffaele could not reasonably be considered a flight risk and yet he was also subjected to precautionary detention. Moreover, he was kept in solitary for about six months IIRC. The only evidence against him at that point were shoe prints that even members of the Sollecito family (without any special training) could see did not match his shoes. I agree that the Italian system has some elements that are worthy of emulation, yet something in the system is seriously out of kilter when one considers the unjustness of the events prior to the trial.

Given the lack of privacy in jail even for attorney/client conversations not being able to fully help with one's defense is a big disadvantage. Mignini would not hesitate to eavesdrop on them if he thought he could as in the case with the police and journalists.

Also, she would have had the chance to counter the media blitz if she so chose.

I don't think that he was kept for quite that long in solitary but his being kept at all made no sense. The fact that their system allows a person to be kept in jail for a year without being charged is outrageous. If they feel that the evidence is so strong they should be able to charge within a few weeks at most.

I thought they hired an expert but his sister was a trained cop so not exactly a lay person.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

rings

I thought they hired an expert but his sister was a trained cop so not exactly a lay person.

They did hire an expert at some point, Francesco Vinci, and he did a very good job IMO. However, I seem to recall that it was a family member who searched for a pair like Guede's at shoe stores (it was an older model). I also seem to recall that another family member counted the rings on the soles of the Outbreak 2 shoes and on the Air Force 1 shoes. My point is that the police would have had to have been not very good at their jobs to miss the difference.
EDT
Candace Dempsey (Murder in Italy, p. 253) reported that Dr. Vinci found the shoe box and Raffaele's uncle Giuseppi bought a pair. Annamaria suggested counting and measuring the rings. Raffaele also discusses the search for the shoes on p. 116 and again on pp. 118-119 of Honor Bound. Putting together the two accounts of the period around his university exam, I am inclined to say that he was in solitary for no more than three months.

 

[Bill Williams]

Given the lack of privacy in jail even for attorney/client conversations not being able to fully help with one's defense is a big disadvantage. Mignini would not hesitate to eavesdrop on them if he thought he could as in the case with the police and journalists.

Also, she would have had the chance to counter the media blitz if she so chose.

I don't think that he was kept for quite that long in solitary but his being kept at all made no sense. The fact that their system allows a person to be kept in jail for a year without being charged is outrageous. If they feel that the evidence is so strong they should be able to charge within a few weeks at most.

While not directly related to this - last night CNN had a piece on the Oscar Pistorius bail hearing, and how important it was for Pistorius to make bail.

The lawyers on the show were all over the map on what the evidence means in that case, but the one thing they agreed upon was directly relevant to the Sollecito/Knox prosecution.

They all said that it is a game changer to have one's client out of prison and available 24/7. Mark Geragos offered the opinion that it was an advantage that more than offsets the admissions Pistorius made to the bail-judge, admissions he was under no legal obligation to volunteer, and which may contain traps which can be sprung by the prosecution down the road.

I came from that thinking that Mignini knew exactly what he was doing by seeking detention for the two students for as long as possible before charges were laid. For my money, that alone was a tactic to compromise their defence as much as possible.

 

[anglolawyer]

While not directly related to this - last night CNN had a piece on the Oscar Pistorius bail hearing, and how important it was for Pistorius to make bail.

The lawyers on the show were all over the map on what the evidence means in that case, but the one thing they agreed upon was directly relevant to the Sollecito/Knox prosecution.

They all said that it is a game changer to have one's client out of prison and available 24/7. Mark Geragos offered the opinion that it was an advantage that more than offsets the admissions Pistorius made to the bail-judge, admissions he was under no legal obligation to volunteer, and which may contain traps which can be sprung by the prosecution down the road.

I came from that thinking that Mignini knew exactly what he was doing by seeking detention for the two students for as long as possible before charges were laid. For my money, that alone was a tactic to compromise their defence as much as possible.

Bill

You, and the lawyers on the show, are dead right. Not only would A & R's lawyers have had free access to their clients but the two of them would not have had to resist the pressure of prolonged detention. The period 5th - 8th November 2007 was undoubtedly of crucial importance, a mini-case that Mignini won decisively.

 

[Grinder]

Bill

You, and the lawyers on the show, are dead right. Not only would A & R's lawyers have had free access to their clients but the two of them would not have had to resist the pressure of prolonged detention. The period 5th - 8th November 2007 was undoubtedly of crucial importance, a mini-case that Mignini won decisively.

I think you meant to say Grinder was dead right.

 

[anglolawyer]

I think you meant to say Grinder was dead right.

Dead right

 

[Chris_Halkides]

It will not all come out in the wash

I came from that thinking that Mignini knew exactly what he was doing by seeking detention for the two students for as long as possible before charges were laid. For my money, that alone was a tactic to compromise their defence as much as possible.

Indeed. Moreover, Mignini could feed Raffaele stories such as the one about the laundromat with the North African man, while also feeding Amanda complementary false or misleading information in an attempt to get each one to turn on the other.

 

[Grinder]

Dead right

Are you reading that with a comma?

ETA - or a period after Dead?

 

[Grinder]

Indeed. Moreover, Mignini could feed Raffaele stories such as the one about the laundromat with the North African man, while also feeding Amanda complementary false or misleading information in an attempt to get each one to turn on the other.

Did Mignini talk with them after the 5:45 event without a lawyer present? Are you sure that Mignini was the direct source of those examples?

It would have been enough just to get it in the papers and have them get through the TV or other prisoners.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

While not directly related to this - last night CNN had a piece on the Oscar Pistorius bail hearing, and how important it was for Pistorius to make bail.

The lawyers on the show were all over the map on what the evidence means in that case, but the one thing they agreed upon was directly relevant to the Sollecito/Knox prosecution.

They all said that it is a game changer to have one's client out of prison and available 24/7. Mark Geragos offered the opinion that it was an advantage that more than offsets the admissions Pistorius made to the bail-judge, admissions he was under no legal obligation to volunteer, and which may contain traps which can be sprung by the prosecution down the road.

I came from that thinking that Mignini knew exactly what he was doing by seeking detention for the two students for as long as possible before charges were laid. For my money, that alone was a tactic to compromise their defence as much as possible.

There are a number of interesting points in this case so far. However, this quote from the BBC best sums up why Pistoris is out on bail [OUOTE]It's probably fair to assume that the prosecution team never expected to win the argument against bail. Instead their strategy was to force Oscar Pistorius to show his hand, giving a full account of his version of events in order to counter the premeditated murder charge raised at the bail hearing.[/QUOTE]

The full article is http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21554329.

As for the comments from the Steenkamp and the Pistorius families try this link http://news.sky.com/story/1055996/pistorius-oscar-will-never-be-the-same .