• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
One thing I have never seen covered is Meredith's diary or journal. Did she not have one? That would be unusual for such an organized type. Did she not have a calendar both hard copy and online?

If she really was complaining about Amanda did she not send an email or two home on the subject?

That's a great point, Grinder, and one that I never really thought of before. Had Meredith in fact had problems with Amanda, it stands to reason she would have emailed home about them at least a couple of times, if not more. That she didn't speaks volumes about the relationship between the two most likely being perfectly normal and friendly. Were there any complaining emails ever sent, I'm sure the ever-responsible and dignified Kercher family would have undoubtedly handed them over to their lawyer.
 
I don't suppose it's at all possible that when the report is fully read and understood, that there may be quite a few openings for the defence to exploit? That maybe they really are invited to explore fully the possibility that Guede acted alone, or that all the little details that the report say were ignored by Hellmann could not actually be fully gone through? That maybe if the defence were just absolutely more thorough in tying up as many loose ends as possible, and that all prosecution theories are fully addressed that maybe the SC would accept a not guilty verdict in the future?

If the next appeal concludes not guilty and the SC revokes that verdict can this process go on ad infinitum?

Apparently it can. Raffaele's lawyer on 26 March 2013 described it as a potential table tennis match between the lower courts and the SC.

I'm no lawyer. But it does seem that the strategy of having Rudy do a fast track trial, producing a separate SC motivations report for that one - a trial where neither Rudy's defence nor Mignini challenged multiple attackers.... for their own reasons... but it left the SC with a fait de complet about multiple attackers....

.... and then the same SC has to rule on Hellmann's court which in acquitting the pair said it was not his job to rule on multiple attackers, only if AK and RS were involved (which they obviously were not!).....

It then sets up a potential ping pong match where the SC apparently now wants a lower court involving AK and RS to rule on multiple attackers - if if they have to rule that someone else was involved other than the two. Does this mean that the Florence court has to actually find the other attackers if it rules that AK and RS are not them?

This is truly a bizarre situation.

Raffaele's lawyer has already signalled that there will be a lot of ways to exploit this SC motivations report. The devil will be in the details, as CoulsdonUK says.
 
Bill I thought you did ridicule Galati and claim that he just wrote the ridiculous appeal because he was paid by the hour. IIR that incorrectly I apologize in advance.
I may have! But that does not take away from the fact that in writing an appeal, as a lawyer, he's duty bound to represent his client, and put the best case forward that can be put.

And he seems to have won. In fact, the info trickling down is that the SC motivations will be simply a rehash of Galati's appeal document.

To me, it is a ridiculous appeal. Then again, I've pretty much lost that argument - of course with the biases I have, you'll forgive me for adding - not in the arena of world-public opinion.

But for the narrow case of Galati (successfully it seems) representing his client, he wrote the winning appeals document. And I am positive he got paid for his efforts; I may need to withdraw the "by the hour" quip, except that here in my country they are called "billable hours".

If I were to apply guilter logic to this.....

1) Galati is simply one of dozens now profiting from Meredith's murder, incl. Barbie Nadeau with her book, and Andrea Vogt who is trying to create a career out of covering the case.

2) The fact that Galati was paid probably is a reason to distrust anything he wrote.​

I mean, fair is fair. I mean, guilters have gotten a lot of mileage in claiming that Marriott was paid as a "PR Supertanker" for organizing Mellas/Knox exposures to media.
 
You know me, CoulsdonUK, ever on the lookout for Satan himself.

The thing I am looking for is what the press is reporting as, "The Hellmann court should not have dismissed the sex-game gone wrong theory so quickly," or something to that effect.

Where my conspiratorial little mind goes, you know me.... I was about to argue with you that the Milan prosecutor now has the Monster of Florence case on his desk wondering what to do with it.....

But consider these details and where Mr. Diablo himself might reside. Mr. Mignini actually brought four, count 'em, four motives/theories of this crime to the prosecution.

1) The ritualistic killing associated with Hallowe'en, sometimes misreferred to as the Satanic cult theory by my side of things. Acc. to no less than Barbie Nadeau, it took prosecutor Maneula Comodi to threaten her own resignation if Mignini took that to trial.

2) The now preferred sex-game gone wrong theory, which provided the motive for Knox with malice aforethought to bring the knife from Raffaele's.

3) The tension/jealousy between MK and AK theory, which also provided the motive for Knox with malice aforethought to bring the knife from Raffaele's.

4) The "they just did it for no reason" theory, which matched what Massei was later to say about how the knife was brought, with no malice aforethought, Massei said that she habitually and innocently carried the knife for personal protection. But for Mignini, this (now) nihilistic & essentially motiveless crime was why he argued for life in prison and all that solitary time.​

You see, my own bias in this is that the SC has not done the new Florence prosecutor any favours. It's now simply a matter of record that Mr. Mignini in prosecuting this up in the hills of Perugia had a revolving door of motives and theories behind this horrid crime.

My bias is that Mr. Mignini himself saw the need to shift from the sex-game gone wrong theory, to the jealousy/hatred between Meredith & Amanda theory because.....

...... at least there was the potential for evidence for the latter. Mignini could put the British friends as well as Filomena on the stand to grill them as to the civil unrest that brewed below the surface in the cottage prior to the murder.

In short, there simply was no evidence of a sex-game gone wrong at all. None. Zero. Zilch, Nada, Niente. And if you think I am making this up, I would invite you to come up with a reason why Mr. Mignini himself swapped motives/theories twice from the sex-game one he went into court with?

And what happened with Filomena and Sophie and the rest? Under oath they basically said that the tensions were over a racing stripe in the European style toilet. That the marijuana use in the cottage was evenly distributed enough to get even Filomena to say under oath, "Yes, I have sinned," in that department. And yes, they said some nasty things about Knox appearing cold after the murder and not returning hugs and not crying at the proper times and all that.

Yet, even Massei concluded in his motivations report about this, "Meredith and Amanda were at war theory, and Amanda wanted to humiliate or teach Meredith a lesson," theory was bunk. He said that the two had a normal, perhaps good relationship with obvious and normal tensions which result from sharing a living space. (Then again the PLE had destroyed Knox's computer which perhaps had e-mails and pictures to back this normalcy up, but I think I promised you I would not get too conspiratorial!)

So, Mr. Mignini reading the tea leaves makes that the new "motive" was now, that Amanda killed for no reason at all. The worst reason imaginable. After sex-games are dropped for lack of evidence, and after the tensions-between-the-two are dropped for, well, lack of evidence...... it must have been a killing for no reason at all. (Which, essentially, agrees with what everyone on my side has been saying since the beginning - Knox and Sollecito actually had no reason to kill!)

With these details provided courtesy of Mr. Diablo.... can the new prosecutor be thrilled that the SC has pretty much directed the prosecutor to lead with this as the operative theory of the crime: that Meredith was killed in a sex-game gone wrong? Even Mr. Mignini had to travel two degrees of separation from that one!

I for one never ridiculed Galati's appeal document. I said it was written as if he were taking a side, as lawyers do (even though he's a judge, he acted as if a lawyer for a client). What would you have expected Judge Galati to write? Something critical of the client for whom he's writing the appeal document? It's what I would want my own lawyer to write even if I were lying through my teeth! It's what he's paid to do, and I draw no negative connotations from it.

What I do suspect, though, is that the SC motivations report is going to make the new Florence prosecutor's job impossible. There was a reason why Mignini had to abandon the theory the SC says is now prime.... does this mean that the new prosecutor cannot abandon it? I do not know the answer to that question.

I'm wondering if the new prosecutor has the option of simply dropping the charges and now not taking the case to trial? Can an Italian lawyer explain if this is possible?

I mean, the SC has tied one hand behind the new prosecutor's back. Then again, I would say that wouldn't I with the biases I hold?

Whatever the reasons why the "sex-game gone wrong theory" was abandoned - and remember it was abandoned at Massei's trial, not Hellmann's(!) a new prosecutor is going to have to present it, as if there is any evidence to support it.

Maybe he/she too will simply have to abandon it, and get Filomena and Sophie back on the stand to testify to how a racing stripe in a toilet and a joke vibrator, or a non returned hug, leads to a horrible massacre.

You see, the problem IS in the details is it no?
Firstly, I must admit that I am surprised by media reports of the “sex-game gone wrong theory” raised by the Supreme Court as I assumed they would have slammed Hellmann over court procedure and their criminal codes relating to the independent report, if media reports prove accurate then this is kind of saying to the next trial judges “make sure you cover this”!

The Supreme Court are saying amongst other things that Hellmann’s court, not the prosecution, either dismissed this theory or didn’t give it enough attention, therefore as I said above it is a clear indication that the next trial must do so. I guess this criticism of Hellmann’s court is not evidentiary but relates to court procedure and or their criminal codes, same with Curatolo testimony.

I believe the next prosecutor’s job just got easier.
 
One thing I have never seen covered is Meredith's diary or journal. Did she not have one? That would be unusual for such an organized type. Did she not have a calendar both hard copy and online?

If she really was complaining about Amanda did she not send an email or two home on the subject?


Meredith did have a desk or wall calendar. It gets mentioned as having two unidentified fingerprints. She was also into Facebook where depending on who's account you read there's were 50 to 150 photos she uploaded from the Halloween party.
 
Meredith did have a desk or wall calendar. It gets mentioned as having two unidentified fingerprints. She was also into Facebook where depending on who's account you read there's were 50 to 150 photos she uploaded from the Halloween party.

Are you sure it was FB and not MySpace?

I meant a private calendar or diary where things she wouldn't want everyone to see would be kept.
 
Firstly, I must admit that I am surprised by media reports of the “sex-game gone wrong theory” raised by the Supreme Court as I assumed they would have slammed Hellmann over court procedure and their criminal codes relating to the independent report, if media reports prove accurate then this is kind of saying to the next trial judges “make sure you cover this”!

The Supreme Court are saying amongst other things that Hellmann’s court, not the prosecution, either dismissed this theory or didn’t give it enough attention, therefore as I said above it is a clear indication that the next trial must do so. I guess this criticism of Hellmann’s court is not evidentiary but relates to court procedure and or their criminal codes, same with Curatolo testimony.

I believe the next prosecutor’s job just got easier.

Ok - fair enough. I just do not know enough about what it is the new Florence prosecutor is limited to... if indeed limited to anything. The SC's- motivations could be a starting-gun only; yet it's not the prosecutor who some future SC will hold to account, it will actually be the judgement of the court in Florence.

But cosider this, CoulsdonUK.... it was BOTH Massei's court and Hellmann's court which, "dismissed the theory or didn't give it enough attention."

Is that not what fact-finding courts do? Again, I am out of my league here, but (no one seems to want to answer this) what is it about "procedure" that both the Massei court and the Hellmann court violated?

I am aware that the difference between fact-finding, and making judgements based on law and procedure is not as clear cut as us lay people suppose. I'm told that sometimes a superior court simply has to drill down into the fact-finding itself, so as to make an informed opinion as to procedure or law; and that there is no clear boundary between the two; although there is a boundary.

With Curatolo, it is perhaps more straight forward. The court heard his testimony, and found as factual that he was bonkers. And this is before considering Curatolo's own legal woes and the way he'd been used as a professional witness before by the PLE. And now that he's gone.... is the SC saying either:

1) You have to listen to him more, before dismissing him, and then spell out in more length why you dismiss him, or.....

2) The SC is directing you NOT to dismiss him, but take his testimony at face value.​

It would seem to me, an untrained layperson, that #2 is not the SC's job but perhaps #1 is.

And consider this - give that the SC has also said that the new Florence court has to take into account "the scream" at circa 11:30 pm as a clue towards Time-Of-Death, even over and above the autopsy and stomach contents (Mignini ordered body temperature NOT be taken!)... how much leeway does the Florence court have on that one; meaning, how just the Florence judge write a motivations report without fear that the new SC in 2015 won't similarly send it back?

You see where this is going I hope.... so maybe it's not the prosecutor who is going to stay awake nights.

Maybe it is the judge, who may feel compelled to consider things as factual, not because the prosecutor has proved anything, but because the SC has implicitly directed the lower court to find those things as factual.

You see the problem here?

It may be nothing. The defence lawyers are confident and actually do not fear a fair rendering of evidence - there still is not forensic evidence linking these two to the crime.

The first news reports about what the SC says about the C&V report is not that it is illegal in and of itself, but that the SC has ruled (apparently) that Stefanoni's lab did things according to Hoyle and that there simply could not be contamination. Yes, I think the SC said that - I'm open to correction.

If you read the Massei report, Massei gives an answer to why he's similarly confident in those two things about Stefanoni - in fact it is the reason why Massei denied the request for a C&V-like independent review.

How did Massei come to these realizations? He writes that he simply asked Stefanoni herself.... then he asked Stefanoni's boss who runs the lab. "Do you have contamination?" "No, we've never had contamination." Massei: "I then officially don't know why the defence is complaining! I should tell the defence this information and they'll see the light and withdraw their complaints. Stefanoni assures me all is on the up and up."

The SC seems now to have ruled in agreement with Massei.

Well, I guess that settles that! :jaw-dropp
 
Are you sure it was FB and not MySpace?

I meant a private calendar or diary where things she wouldn't want everyone to see would be kept.

If Meredith kept a diary or personal journal on her computer, the Perugia technical team assured that it will never see the light of day.
 
If Meredith kept a diary or personal journal on her computer, the Perugia technical team assured that it will never see the light of day.

Exactly. In 2007 the cloud wasn't pervasive and she easily could have kept a calendar and a diary there.
 
How did Massei come to these realizations? He writes that he simply asked Stefanoni herself.... then he asked Stefanoni's boss who runs the lab. "Do you have contamination?" "No, we've never had contamination." Massei: "I then officially don't know why the defence is complaining! I should tell the defence this information and they'll see the light and withdraw their complaints. Stefanoni assures me all is on the up and up."

Bill I can't find any of your quotes in Massei but I did find this:

In response to a specific question on this point, Dr. Stefanoni declared that she had been working as a biologist for seven years, had always used the same methodology, and had never heard that any problem of contamination of exhibits had occurred.
With respect to the certification ISO 17025, she stated that it was not mandatory, but was done on a voluntary basis, meaning that any laboratory, any [232] institute, even private, can request it from the certification board, so as to be able to state that one’s laboratory works to quality standards.
The Scientific Police had asked for this certification. She added that when the analyses under discussion were performed, there was no public agency which possessed this certification. The Scientific Police and the RACIS (now the RIS) of the Carabinieri were the first to request it.


I think you're making stuff up again.

ETA - as for the body temperature perhaps on the whole exact TOD is less important than gathering circumstantial evidence. I'm absolutely positive that Mignini not allowing the coroner into the room wasn't a move to get the kids. You have spent time arguing that the cottage was compromised yet now you argue more people should have entered the room sooner. How much more exact would TOD be if the temp was taken at 3 or 6?

ETA2 - Bill do you have a cite for the other cases Curatolo was involved with?
 
Last edited:
Just watched a clip form the TODAY show, Ted Simon was included.

The clip starts out stating a totality of the case has to be looked at...not just the lack of DNA or the lack of any motive...

I thought yes, or the lack of many things. A totality of what? a heroin junkie's groggy memory and serial witness words? a little old ladie in her bathroom who can hear people walking on rocks through double pane glass?

totality of the case... I'm stuck on this term!

while Maresca refuses to let Rudy Guede be drilled in public on his lying? a budget crisis from Nov 5/6 only that prevented recording the interrogation to be legal, and at least fair?

Totality of the entire case or just the totality of the prosecutions side of things?
 
Bill I can't find any of your quotes in Massei but I did find this:

In response to a specific question on this point, Dr. Stefanoni declared that she had been working as a biologist for seven years, had always used the same methodology, and had never heard that any problem of contamination of exhibits had occurred.
With respect to the certification ISO 17025, she stated that it was not mandatory, but was done on a voluntary basis, meaning that any laboratory, any [232] institute, even private, can request it from the certification board, so as to be able to state that one’s laboratory works to quality standards.
The Scientific Police had asked for this certification. She added that when the analyses under discussion were performed, there was no public agency which possessed this certification. The Scientific Police and the RACIS (now the RIS) of the Carabinieri were the first to request it.


I think you're making stuff up again.

ETA - as for the body temperature perhaps on the whole exact TOD is less important than gathering circumstantial evidence. I'm absolutely positive that Mignini not allowing the coroner into the room wasn't a move to get the kids. You have spent time arguing that the cottage was compromised yet now you argue more people should have entered the room sooner. How much more exact would TOD be if the temp was taken at 3 or 6?

ETA2 - Bill do you have a cite for the other cases Curatolo was involved with?

I believe she talked about this in her testimony which I will dig up shortly. As for Curatolo there are several quotes. Dempsey says this...

Toto Curatolo (who had a role as a witness as well in two other trials for terrible crimes, among which are the murder of poor Mrs. Scota, landlady, killed in Via delle Cantine, and the murder of the very young North African Najla Dridi, killed in the swimming pool of Via Pompeo Pellini) at that time in reconstruction of the investigation of the Kercher murder is one of the witnesses of delayed action who, that is, have made their statements at a distance of months).

Two articles mention the Scota case...

http://translate.google.com/transla...YQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNEzjs-sgRXF-9z_d30RKqhMH06xjQ

http://translate.google.com/transla...wQFjAE&usg=AFQjCNHj-iiiSBM4I4TzYPNRno-3Y0U4jA

Interestingly, the prosecutor in the Scota case was Paolo Micheli...

http://qn.quotidiano.net/1999/10/27...LL-OMICIDIO-DELL-AFFITTACAMERE-PERUGINA.shtml

I was never able to find a good link to an article on the Dridi case.
 
Bill I can't find any of your quotes in Massei but I did find this:

In response to a specific question on this point, Dr. Stefanoni declared that she had been working as a biologist for seven years, had always used the same methodology, and had never heard that any problem of contamination of exhibits had occurred.
With respect to the certification ISO 17025, she stated that it was not mandatory, but was done on a voluntary basis, meaning that any laboratory, any [232] institute, even private, can request it from the certification board, so as to be able to state that one’s laboratory works to quality standards.
The Scientific Police had asked for this certification. She added that when the analyses under discussion were performed, there was no public agency which possessed this certification. The Scientific Police and the RACIS (now the RIS) of the Carabinieri were the first to request it.


I think you're making stuff up again.

ETA - as for the body temperature perhaps on the whole exact TOD is less important than gathering circumstantial evidence. I'm absolutely positive that Mignini not allowing the coroner into the room wasn't a move to get the kids. You have spent time arguing that the cottage was compromised yet now you argue more people should have entered the room sooner. How much more exact would TOD be if the temp was taken at 3 or 6?

ETA2 - Bill do you have a cite for the other cases Curatolo was involved with?

Making stuff up "again". Set the GPS, Helen, we're going around the block again. To cut to the chase the issue is you do not accept the sources.

However with that said I hope everyone does as you do - actually go to Massei's report to check. All of us, me included should stick close to actual text.
 
Making stuff up "again". Set the GPS, Helen, we're going around the block again. To cut to the chase the issue is you do not accept the sources.

However with that said I hope everyone does as you do - actually go to Massei's report to check. All of us, me included should stick close to actual text.

You said it was from Massei -
If you read the Massei report, Massei gives an answer to why he's similarly confident in those two things about Stefanoni - in fact it is the reason why Massei denied the request for a C&V-like independent review.

How did Massei come to these realizations? He writes that he simply asked Stefanoni herself.

So what does believing in True Crime Novels have anything to do with it? No resetting of GPS but perhaps someone should have Scotty beam them up.
 
Are you sure it was FB and not MySpace?


The articles I'm finding all say FaceBook. Amanda had the MySpace page.

If the two of them couldn't even be on the same page, is it even possible that thhe could be friends?
 
Stefi's testimony on the certification...(Google translation), 22 May

ANSWER - It is a certification that we are holding out for several months now for over a year, we have implemented procedures for the certification of quality, ie in the near future, perhaps by summer, we hope, our laboratories will be accredited by a certifying body for precisely the quality certification ISO 9001, certifies that this certification, I'm sorry the pun on words, that virtually all of our procedures from handling the cards, then the documents arrive in our offices, our laboratory until the conclusion of the work ... let's say specifically in this case of biology, but also applicable to other laboratories, following very specific procedures, which are pretty standard ones that provide a best practice analysis and say a good work practice, so every step of work will follow the rules, just very specific procedures that are indicated by ...
Q. - To explain to the Court, perhaps because I have informed me, who gives this certification to the 9001?
ANSWER - It is an external certification body.
Q. - Are there any labs that already have this certification?
ANSWER - I think some of the laboratories of universities, yes, some universities have in their laboratories, in particular, the certifications of this kind, then there is another that is just special ...
Q. - Now we come to the second, now I can tell, for now I wanted to stop at 9001, so the 9001 is a quality certification, the procedures that you have described before, the beginning of his testimony that, at the time have been implemented it is fair to say that 9001 did not have the certification?
ANSWER - No, had not we still have the certification.
Q. - Do not you have more.*
ANSWER - The will in the near future.
Q. - What interests me for now defending him, then ...*
ANSWER - Yes.
Q. - So there was no time. Then switch to the other certification, if you can explain, we've talked about this certification is the certification for now ... the procedures are correct.*
ANSWER - Yes.
Q. - The sequence is what I have said, are certified by an entity, rather than what is ISO 17025?
ANSWER - It is a certification that applies in particular to the findings of laboratory technicians, so in terms more specifically say how to say ... (inc.) to this standard, called ISO this evidence, so any lab test, so any analysis that procedures he performs, not only have to say ... as codified procedures, but are also certified with the tools and equipment that have to interact with this analysis, so I will not know, I calibrate the SCALE weighs a reagent, I will have the certification in a reagent that I use, that I will have the brochures I certify that the reagent has been produced in accordance with these quality standards, and therefore the whole chain of analysis that underlies these screening methods laboratory specifically.
Q. - To have these certifications gives the guarantee of good results?
ANSWER - Yes.
Q. - With respect to these two certifications is one of two that is more significant than the other, the 9001 or 17025?
RESPONSE - In terms of laboratory work that is most definitely the 17025 relevant to laboratory work.
Q. - So it is safe to say, to explain to them that the weight of 17025 is about how one thing ... that's what you do.*
ANSWER - Yes.
 
I believe she talked about this in her testimony which I will dig up shortly. As for Curatolo there are several quotes. Dempsey says this...



Two articles mention the Scota case...

http://translate.google.com/transla...YQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNEzjs-sgRXF-9z_d30RKqhMH06xjQ

http://translate.google.com/transla...wQFjAE&usg=AFQjCNHj-iiiSBM4I4TzYPNRno-3Y0U4jA

Interestingly, the prosecutor in the Scota case was Paolo Micheli...

http://qn.quotidiano.net/1999/10/27...LL-OMICIDIO-DELL-AFFITTACAMERE-PERUGINA.shtml

I was never able to find a good link to an article on the Dridi case.

I much appreciate your efforts but none of the articles mentions Curatolo that I can see.

CD is not a reliable source for me as she doesn't annotate. She appears to have relied on others for material without doing due diligence.

I am not saying he didn't testify in those cases and in fact tend to believe he must have since the PGP haven't contested it but I've never seen proof of it.

Curatolo should not be considered as he didn't come forward and in fact told detectives he had seen nothing (proven liar) and he was admittedly high (or low) on heroin in addition to getting the scene wrong.
 
Stefi's testimony on the certification...(Google translation), 22 May

Thanks again I truly appreciate your store of information.

Bill gave us quotes that don't exist in your translation, really nothing close. The quote I gave from Massei was about certification.

How did Massei come to these realizations? He writes that he simply asked Stefanoni herself.... then he asked Stefanoni's boss who runs the lab. "Do you have contamination?" "No, we've never had contamination." Massei: "I then officially don't know why the defence is complaining! I should tell the defence this information and they'll see the light and withdraw their complaints. Stefanoni assures me all is on the up and up."

As I said earlier it appears these quotes by Massei were just made up. Always willing be shown that they actually were made.
 
And then on 23 May the specific Quote Massei is referring to...

Q. - The ISO 17025 is required?
ANSWER - No, no, it's on a voluntary basis, that is an institution, a
laboratory, say, any institution, including private, public, or who
willfully makes a request to the
certification in order to have that, too, he could boast of having
worked as a laboratory.
Q. - The Scientific Police has asked that the result, the're asking?
ANSWER - Yes, and we have already asked to be here at all ... just say
to start implementing all the procedures for accreditation then.
Q. - When she did, then a year ago, a year and a half ago when I
started the investigation and the investigation began in Italy there
were other public bodies, because never mind the private sector which
is another thing, we are public She is public, I'm public, other public
agencies involved in investigations ... forensic analysis, forensic
type, so in essence the Scientific Police primarily for the Police and
RIS for the Policemen, there were public bodies who had this
certification?
ANSWER - No, no. We are the first with the Racis. Q. - You are the
first to have it applied?
ANSWER - For having asked Racis with the Carabinieri. Q. - The Racis is
the new symbol of the RIS is essentially the same thing.
ANSWER - Yes, basically it is our central counterpart, while the RIS is
the regional counterpart
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom