Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Bill Williams]

If we assume as someone here suggested that the Supremes were not following the case closely but did read or at least scan the bs in the newspapers leading up to the first trial they probably don't like how Hellman did not re-review much of this "evidence" in the appeal - at least as expressed in the appeal court motivation report. The most positive explanation is that the Supremes want a trial that ties up all the loose ends, makes its own decision on the DNA evidence (Hellmann just "accepted" C&V conclusions (the only intelligent and rational man in Italy) puts Guede at the center and forefront of the crime and (hopefully I think) makes a sensible decision. IMO any sensible decision has to find AK & RS innocent.

The irony is that Massei too, in his motivations report, puts Rudy at the centre and forefront of this crime. All AK and RS did, acc. to Massei was make a "choice for evil" when the decision point came. The best kept secret until the new Florence trial will be how much the SC repudiates Massei's court! Massei debunked sex games gone wrong. It's as if the SC is ruling on the facts, some rejected by both lower courts!!

 

[MattJones]

Hellmann took new testimony and reviewed old testimony. This is supposed to be a trial de novo so one would presume the answer is yes.

That was my guess. Would be very curious to know the answer.

 

[Bill Williams]

This SC report has as its subtext that the accusation by PLE and Mignini wss enough. Why bother with either of the lower trials?

 

[Wildhorses]

The best I can do is that the SC seems to be ruling that this is only one aspect of a larger, loosely assembled circumstantial case that Hellmann wrongly dismissed.

The SC seems to be saying that if there are all sorts of, even unconnected elements of fact there is actually no need for a unifying narrative pointing to guilt. The SC seems to be saying that it is correct to do what Massei did - simply invent things (like Knox innocently carrying the kitchen knife for protection - something the prosecution didn't even claim) to bolster a wide ranging "feeling" that they might be guilty.

I'm trying to understand the highlighted sentence. Aren't they saying: there IS a need for a unifying narrative that takes into account witness statements and other unconnected and in-congruent elements?

Doesn't matter if the narrative makes sense or is backed by evidence: the important thing IS to invent a story that incorporates every lunatic element of the prosecution's case.

 

[Dan O.]

Why do you say this? I haven't heard this before.

I hadn't heard anything about it either until I stumbled onto this article: http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/tessin/story/Amanda-Knox--Ex-darf-nicht-im-Tessin-wohnen-12049209

My limited searches seemed to indicate there was a single source promoting this action going back several days earlier. Perhaps someone that can read the language would do better.

ETA: The Mail gives more details: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...abandon-country-residence-permit-revoked.html

 

[Bill Williams]

The best I can do is that the SC seems to be ruling that this is only one aspect of a larger, loosely assembled circumstantial case that Hellmann wrongly dismissed.

The SC seems to be saying that if there are all sorts of, even unconnected elements of fact there is actually no need for a unifying narrative pointing to guilt. The SC seems to be saying that it is correct to do what Massei did - simply invent things (like Knox innocently carrying the kitchen knife for protection - something the prosecution didn't even claim) to bolster a wide ranging "feeling" that they might be guilty.

I'm trying to understand the highlighted sentence. Aren't they saying: there IS a need for a unifying narrative that takes into account witness statements and other unconnected and in-congruent elements?

Doesn't matter if the narrative makes sense or is backed by evidence: the important thing IS to invent a story that incorporates every lunatic element of the prosecution's case.

I'm struggling to understand the SC report, with what has been released. It seems so far to be a simply rewrite of what Galati presented. (Must be nice to have the top court in the country in your hip pocket, but I digress!)

I cannot read Italian, so am stuck with the little snippets appearing around the web in English. One of the snippets seemed to be that Hellmann needed to have dealt with all the little stuff, no matter how small. The SC seems to be saying that when these little snippets are assembled, they are suggestive of guilt for the two students.

I mean, what I truly don't get is that Amanda Knox is not even in the murder room forensically speaking. And this is Stefanoni. It's one of the reasons I don't believe, really, in a concious frame-up by the PLE.... how hard is it to frame someone... a little DNA here, a little DNA there, collected from Knox's comb at prison.

There was NONE in the murder room, and this was the PLE and Judge Massei who concluded this.

I've freshly read Massei's reasoning for concluding that Stefanoni "proved" that the bra-clasp DNA was Raffaele's. I was not convince by the argument, but (hey!) I'm biased I guess.

So what the SC seems to have dismissed the acquittals over is "all the other evidence", most of which is vapourware.

Regardless that BOTH trials, finders of fact, both Massei and Hellmann nixed the idea of a sex-game gone wrong - here's the SC, which is not supposed to be fact-finding to begin with, says, "Yes it is." Did the SC depose witnesses on this point? No. They read Galati. I'm awaiting eagerly the mistake in either law or procedure that Hellmann made (as well as Massei!) in finding as factual that there was no motive for Knox and Sollecito to have been involved in this crime, much less that it was a sex-game gone wrong.

Geez Louise, the SC just ruled as garbage Massei's own theory that Knox routinely and innocently carried that knife for protection, and did not carry it to the cottage with malice in her heart. The SC seems to have scotched Massei, too!

Who are the fact finders here, anyway?

But back to your highlight of my post. I obviously have not read the SC motivations.... Italian speakers have. They seem to be saying that before Hellmann had the right to knock down Massei's conviction with an acquittal, Hellmann had to have dealt with all the little stuff.... like the 12:47 phone call. I for the life of me don't see why.... it obvious bothers the guilters, too.....

I just wish that someone, anyone, would put together a comprehensive narrative that shows why Knox and Sollecito are guilty. No guilter that I know of has even tried.... Machiavelli says it's not necessary.

I now know what Raffaele means when he says in his book, that he always thought the next decision made by a court would exonerate them, and then they'd run into another roadblock of judicial ******* from an unexpected quarter.

The SC seems to be following in that grand tradition. Galati just does not make sense.... then again, the SC thinks he does.

I know one thing for sure.... I am NEVER going to Italy. Mexico on the other hand has just released two Canadians from moths' in jail, because their Supreme Court ruled that the police cannot actually beat an arrestee. And if the police do beat an arrestee, then it is an illegal arrest and the so-called perp is let go because it is better to have perps on the street than cops who behave illegally.

Apparently not in Italy.

 

[Draca]

I hadn't heard anything about it either until I stumbled onto this article: http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/tessin/story/Amanda-Knox--Ex-darf-nicht-im-Tessin-wohnen-12049209

My limited searches seemed to indicate there was a single source promoting this action going back several days earlier. Perhaps someone that can read the language would do better.

ETA: The Mail gives more details: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...abandon-country-residence-permit-revoked.html

Thanks

 

[anglolawyer]

I have said all along that I think Ms. Knox is innocent of murder.

I know Matt, but you have also embarked on a hunt for 'hard facts' thus putting your conclusion out in front of your enquiry. I had assumed, accordingly, that your opinion was of a provisional nature, subject to amendment in light of said facts.

 

[RandyN]

Well, ABC says this:

"The Supreme Court judges are not judging the merit or worth of the testimony or evidence, but rather the process that the Appeals Court used to reach its verdict."

And this:

"They also suggested the Appeals Court was wrong to dismiss the testimony of a key witness as unreliable simply because he was a homeless person who frequented a public square. The man claimed he saw Knox and Sollecito with Guede near the park the night of the murder, which took place the day after Halloween."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/amanda-kno...heory-sex-game/story?id=19427055#.UcCn2JxTCFC

Not sure this is actually in the SC motivation report but if it is then it is incorrect. Toto was not dismissed simply because he was homeless. He was dismissed because he could not reconcile the correct date, he was incoherent and he admitted to being high on heroin.

Had the defense had a shot at him or bothered themselves to wake up during his cross exam then it would have also came out that he was an eye witness in two other murder cases for Perugia prosecutors. Which makes him highly suspicious based on that alone.

How can the SC judge the evidence presented by Toto at the appeal trial? This seems impossible for them to do as well as beyond the scope of their duties. In fact this seems to indicate that the ISC is determined to break any law and make any speculative conclusion they wish to make. What procedure was misapplied?

As for the bolded statement above ...I have already written to ABC news to ask for confirmation that Toto testified that he saw RS, AK, and RG together in the park that night.

I already know perfectly well that no such claim was ever made. Toto testified that he saw the two... AK and RS in the park from 9:30 until midnight. Nothing about Guede at all. And in fact now that Toto is dead...I wonder how they intend to handle his "evidence"? I say go with it ....yep they were in the park during the murder. A perfect alibi.

I seem to be hearing that the SC has positive proof that more than one person was involved in this murder. I wonder what that proof is? In 4 years of trial I haven't heard anything about any evidence of multiple assailants...you know footprints, DNA, finger prints, cctv video, semen of someone else...nothing except for Guede...and those two non repeatable LCN traces of non standard and clearly contrived results (one for each of AK and RS) Certainly they cant mean those proven wrong DNA samples are any indication of anything. Except for strong indications of police or prosecution misconduct or corruption or sheer stupidity...take your pick.

What Italians call illogical is astoundingly illogical. Is that ironic or illogical?

 

[Wildhorses]

If we assume as someone here suggested that the Supremes were not following the case closely but did read or at least scan the bs in the newspapers leading up to the first trial they probably don't like how Hellman did not re-review much of this "evidence" in the appeal - at least as expressed in the appeal court motivation report. The most positive explanation is that the Supremes want a trial that ties up all the loose ends, makes its own decision on the DNA evidence (Hellmann just "accepted" C&V conclusions (the only intelligent and rational man in Italy) puts Guede at the center and forefront of the crime and (hopefully I think) makes a sensible decision. IMO any sensible decision has to find AK & RS innocent.

To me, the take-home message of this case is that tabloid and internet misinformation sticks. I realize a big, fat element of corruption was in operation with respect to evidence collection and analysis. But IMO that doesn't explain the thinking of judges who aren't in thrall to Mignini.

The case was initially complicated by the tabloid lies and hysteria that surrounded it. With every decision, re-analysis of "evidence," and act of deception (e.g., attempt to palm off false negative controls), it became more complicated. Elements that would otherwise be clear and simple have been obscured by distortions and complications. IMO it's now impossible for a SC judge -- or anyone -- to cut through the BS without a hefty amount of dedicated study.

IMO, consciously or subconsciously, the Supremes were influenced by visions of bleach receipts, a blood-drenched bathroom, mixed blood, bloody footprints, confusion over when the police were called – and dozens of other tabloid/internet myths. Humans are naturally influenced by such things, but more so when the basic facts aren’t clear.

I’m not remotely defending the Italian legal system. I just don’t think every member of the judiciary is corrupt and illogical. So I attribute much of this mess to the fact that if you generate enough BS some sticks – and sticks in ways difficult to vanquish.

(I also think a key difference between PGPs and PIPs is (subconscious) susceptibility to the stickiness of BS.)

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I'm trying to understand the highlighted sentence. Aren't they saying: there IS a need for a unifying narrative that takes into account witness statements and other unconnected and in-congruent elements?

Doesn't matter if the narrative makes sense or is backed by evidence: the important thing IS to invent a story that incorporates every lunatic element of the prosecution's case.

Massei did his best with that, and he came up with a story that makes no sense whatever.

Meanwhile, the crime scene photos show exactly what happened, which is why everyone on the prosecution side ignores them completely.

 

[bri1]

Even though she was young, Miss Knox was a mature girl, born and raised in a country where one is not allowed to wrongly accuse another person to free oneself from a difficult situation," the judges wrote.
I'm sorry, but wasn't the only thing AK was convicted for was he 'false accusation'??? And three years isn't enough? It's an unduly lenient sentence which is being reviewed, but an ex TV presenter here, was yesterday sentenced to 15 months for sexually assaulting 13 girls between 9 and 17 years of age.

 

[Wildhorses]

Even though she was young, Miss Knox was a mature girl, born and raised in a country where one is not allowed to wrongly accuse another person to free oneself from a difficult situation," the judges wrote.
I'm sorry, but wasn't the only thing AK was convicted for was he 'false accusation'??? And three years isn't enough? It's an unduly lenient sentence which is being reviewed, but an ex TV presenter here, was yesterday sentenced to 15 months for sexually assaulting 13 girls between 9 and 17 years of age.

It's over. It's beyond hope.

The judiciary has whipped itself into a state of psychosis. No amount of reason can surmount the prejudices and delusions that have taken hold. Knox is a witch. End of story.

The only thing left to hope, IMO, is that Raff can get out of Italy.

 

[MattJones]

Does someone have information on the respective heights, weights, and physical condition of the two accused and the victim at the time of the crime?

 

[GreyFox]

I just cant see anyway your going to prove the sex game gone wrong theory. The Satanic cult thing was dumb ,but better.Then they were just evil.

To even get to this point you must first show the three defendants knew each other well enough to commit a rape and trust each other wouldn't tell. Complete strangers like RS and RG dont just get stoned and hold someone down for a sex game.What was in it for Knox (motive)? Why would she let her boyfreind particapate? Where's proof that she did?

What exactly is the name of the sex game? Do you use dice? I've heard of spin the bottle but what is this one called and how do you play. You can't just say Sex Game.
I would think one would have to prove the game exist. Show rules or bring people forward who have played it before.Will we see an animated porn from Mignini that shows how the three did it ? Maybe Stilicho and other PGP can chip in and pay for this one.

 

[GreyFox]

This doesn't exactly bold well for (PGP)Pro Guede People either.The guy whom you claim came over to the Virgin (saint) Merideth's apartment for some casual butt sex,is now not just a burgalar but for once you have to look at him as a rapist also.Yet somehow you still can't believe he would break a window to get in. You seem convinced that one of these girls would trust him (be dumb)enough to open the FN door !!!

 

[Wildhorses]

I just cant see anyway your going to prove the sex game gone wrong theory. The Satanic cult thing was dumb ,but better.Then they were just evil.

To even get to this point you must first show the three defendants knew each other well enough to commit a rape and trust each other wouldn't tell. Complete strangers like RS and RG dont just get stoned and hold someone down for a sex game.What was in it for Knox (motive)? Why would she let her boyfreind particapate? Where's proof that she did?

What exactly is the name of the sex game? Do you use dice? I've heard of spin the bottle but what is this one called and how do you play. You can't just say Sex Game.
I would think one would have to prove the game exist. Show rules or bring people forward who have played it before.Will we see an animated porn from Mignini that shows how the three did it ? Maybe Stilicho and other PGP can chip in and pay for this one.

You got it all backwards.

There's no need to prove the sex-game-gone-wrong theory. It is proved and shall remain proved until DISproved.

There's no need to prove the three defendants knew each other. It is proved -- they raped and murder together, right? It shall remain proved until DISproved.

These statements were true before the causation report, but now they're MORE true. And now it's more difficult to disprove anything. According the the causation report, an argument is invalid if it contradicts any conclusion made by ILE during the "immediacy of the initial investigation."

Mignini already showed his animated porn.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

What exactly is the name of the sex game? Do you use dice? I've heard of spin the bottle but what is this one called and how do you play. You can't just say Sex Game.
I would think one would have to prove the game exist. Show rules or bring people forward who have played it before.Will we see an animated porn from Mignini that shows how the three did it ? Maybe Stilicho and other PGP can chip in and pay for this one.

"Sex game" is a pair of syllables which looks at first glance like an explanation, but which turns out not to refer to anything in existence. It's a thought-stopping non-explanation, not a theory of the crime.

I guess it's replacing the older meme, "rape prank", which was also a non-explanation masquerading as a thing that actually happens.

 

[Wildhorses]

I just caught up on posts I missed.

Biggest surprise: Coulsdon's prescience. He must have a friend on the SC.

 

[JREF2010]

Even though she was young, Miss Knox was a mature girl, born and raised in a country where one is not allowed to wrongly accuse another person to free oneself from a difficult situation," the judges wrote.
I'm sorry, but wasn't the only thing AK was convicted for was he 'false accusation'??? And three years isn't enough? It's an unduly lenient sentence which is being reviewed, but an ex TV presenter here, was yesterday sentenced to 15 months for sexually assaulting 13 girls between 9 and 17 years of age.

This damage of the interrogation just doesn't go away.
The Italian squad should be ashamed of them selves, they know the truth of the interrogation and those police involved must have a sick soul to let this go on.

When I look at scientific evidence, Rudy is simple to convict, the murder is simple to understand, the evidence is straightforward and sane.

To force Amanda and Raffaele into this crime, the courts need the interrogation without recordings, missing raw data of the DNA, a insane prosecutor like Migninni, dishonest police like Napoleoni and Facara, computer harddrives ruined, destroyed evidence from poor forensic storage and collection, heroin bums seeing things in the dark, old ladies foggy tales, no clear motive, there's too many to list...

I have no horse in this race, but its simple to see there is a great dishonesty about this trial, a suspicious system of vendetta against these two kids, its simple to see.

Now its the ISC versus Amanda and Raffaele......while secretly Rudy Guede the rapist murderer prepares to sneak out the prison doors and probably laughing like the devil himself, as he watches this Italian system he's made a mockery of.