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

[Bill Williams]

Bill my interest is what the defense should be doing. I include all aspects of the defense including the press relations. If you are correct by a mere 5% and she is found not guilty then that should be the end of it even if the ISC reverses a second time. By that I mean it will be over for everybody outside of Italy.

What do you think the message from the defense should be? Do you think that announcing her intent not to attend is helpful? Do you believe that when the trial starts the media will skip noting her lack of attendance because of the inoculating statement by her lawyer?

I have no interest whatever in giving advice to the lawyers. Who really cares any there are many variables one of which is that this new process is more about Raffaele's liberty than Amanda's. I wouldn't begin to know the judgement called for in how any pretrial "announcement" would effect a trial she's not legally required to attend to begin win.

I'm getting in touch with my inner CoulsdonUK here really. It eithrr just not important or simply meaningless to the process to come what any of us bleacher sitters believe or don't believe. I do agree however that if the Florence court reaquits and the ISC sends it back for a fourth trial in 2016 that will about seal Italy's foreign reputation.

The only question would be how much of that Italians themselves would continue to stomach.

 

[Grinder]

Why do you insist in those numbers? They correpond to 2011 only.

Data from 1959 to 2011:

Judgements finding at least one violation

Turkey (absolute worst) - 2404
Italy - 1651
Germany - 159


Source: http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Overview_2011_ENG.pdf

In fairness the vast majority of Italy's violations were for too long of time for trials. While their system does take forever and it is a problem, it isn't exactly saying the end results were wrong.

Of the 1651, 1155 were for length of proceedings.

France had more violations for a right to a fair trial which would seem more important. Russia, Romania, Poland,and Turkey have far more of that type.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Why do you insist in those numbers? They correpond to 2011 only.

Data from 1959 to 2011:

Judgements finding at least one violation

Turkey (absolute worst) - 2404
Italy - 1651
Germany - 159


Source: http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Overview_2011_ENG.pdf

Meredith was murdered 2007 but you wish to compare 1959 to 2011! I thought 2011 was a bit of a stretch, but 1959 – 2011?

Really? Come on give up on this!

 

[MDDVS]

In fairness the vast majority of Italy's violations were for too long of time for trials. While their system does take forever and it is a problem, it isn't exactly saying the end results were wrong.

Of the 1651, 1155 were for length of proceedings.

France had more violations for a right to a fair trial which would seem more important. Russia, Romania, Poland,and Turkey have far more of that type.

I don't see why the right to a speedy trial is somehow a less important right than the others. A long trial is dangerous because it can be used as a tool to destroy the live of any citizen just by accusing him of a crime. Even if you are found innocent at the end you will be finacially ruined, with your reputation destroyed and possibly even have served many years in jail by the time the final verdict comes. So I don't agree that we should look lightly at violations of the right to a speedy trial.

Incidentally, these also classify as violations to the article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the human rights convention.

It's also interesting that you mention France, which is one of the two European countries with most similar judicial systems to the italian (the other being Portugal), so no surprise here, it's just that Italy's even worse.

It doesn't matter how you slice it, Italy has one of the worst track records, and the absolute worst among Western European countries.

 

[Grinder]

I have no interest whatever in giving advice to the lawyers. Who really cares any there are many variables one of which is that this new process is more about Raffaele's liberty than Amanda's. I wouldn't begin to know the judgement called for in how any pretrial "announcement" would effect a trial she's not legally required to attend to begin win.

Looks like you were typing pretty fast .

I think it is about both of them and I wasn't talking primarily about the trial. If you reread what I said, it was that if the Florentine court convicts what they do between now and then could make the difference over here.

I have said it many a time that what we write has little to no chance of ever making any difference or reaching the powers that be. That doesn't mean that discussing what the lawyers and others involved with the defense could or should do.

I'm getting in touch with my inner CoulsdonUK here really. It eithrr just not important or simply meaningless to the process to come what any of us bleacher sitters believe or don't believe. I do agree however that if the Florence court reaquits and the ISC sends it back for a fourth trial in 2016 that will about seal Italy's foreign reputation.

The only question would be how much of that Italians themselves would continue to stomach.

Well okay but then why post at all? If the measure is influence the process only Dan O can take any credit for building his resource Wiki.

I doubt this trial will seal anything for Italy. They have slept with far bigger fish and survived.

How what I speculate about has less value than quoting made up quotes by true crime authors does escape me, but I'm not fluent in Latin which seems to be important .

 

[Bill Williams]

I'm getting in touch with my inner CoulsdonUK here really. It eithrr just not important or simply meaningless to the process to come what any of us bleacher sitters believe or don't believe. I do agree however that if the Florence court reaquits and the ISC sends it back for a fourth trial in 2016 that will about seal Italy's foreign reputation.

The only question would be how much of that Italians themselves would continue to stomach.

Well okay but then why post at all?

You're going to have to ask that of CoulsdonUK!

I doubt this trial will seal anything for Italy. They have slept with far bigger fish and survived.

How what I speculate about has less value than quoting made up quotes by true crime authors does escape me, but I'm not fluent in Latin which seems to be important .

Sigh - we're back on that are we!? I'm still glad you're back, you were missed here. But after taking another swipe at "true crime" I think we may need to put the proposition to a vote!

I agree, though, this case promises to have a far bigger impact for Italy - but for its reputation outside of Italy. It says a lot, doesn't it, that inside Italy this is simply another day at the office.

 

[MDDVS]

Meredith was murdered 2007 but you wish to compare 1959 to 2011! I thought 2011 was a bit of a stretch, but 1959 – 2011?

Really? Come on give up on this!

I don't get your point.

These numbers show a pattern of a malfunctioning judicial system (acknowledged by the italian courts themselves) that tends to produce abuses of human rights. The system didn't change that much throughout those years (as can be seen from the 2011 statistics you mentioned, for example).

 

[Grinder]

I don't see why the right to a speedy trial is somehow a less important right than the others. A long trial is dangerous because it can be used as a tool to destroy the live of any citizen just by accusing him of a crime. Even if you are found innocent at the end you will be finacially ruined, with your reputation destroyed and possibly even have served many years in jail by the time the final verdict comes. So I don't agree that we should look lightly at violations of the right to a speedy trial.

Well I see the speedy trial as less important than a fair trial which is one of their categories. Of course you are right that it is important for the reasons you laid out and had Amanda and Raf been found innocent at the first trial as they should, the two years would have been a travesty.

I was merely pointing out that Italy's system, even when working well in terms of guilt and innocence, has systemic violations built in - length of trials.

Incidentally, these also classify as violations to the article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the human rights convention.

Okay as you laid out above there is good reason for a speedy trial but it is far different than a fair trial in common perception.

It's also interesting that you mention France, which is one of the two European countries with most similar judicial systems to the italian (the other being Portugal), so no surprise here, it's just that Italy's even worse.

Except France is worse for what are categorized as a fair trial in your linked report.

It doesn't matter how you slice it, Italy has one of the worst track records, and the absolute worst among Western European countries.

Well it does matter how you slice it. France had more violations for fair trials and that seems more important than speedy trials.

I do agree that this case was butchered by the ILE and the trial was a farce and should be in the unfair trial category.

 

[Grinder]

Sigh - we're back on that are we!? I'm still glad you're back, you were missed here. But after taking another swipe at "true crime" I think we may need to put the proposition to a vote!

Bill I was only pointing out that my speculations on how the defense team should be positioning Amanda is as valid (at least) as your trying to win points by quoting the PGP true crime author.

Nothing we do here will impact anything except some of Anglo's and my p) breakthroughs - message erased and Patrick's house not being searched., knives tested and his wife not arrested or at least taken in.

It would interest me what others think should be being done at this time in terms of media work but apparently only Randy and I think it is important.

 

[Bill Williams]

I don't get your point.

These numbers show a pattern of a malfunctioning judicial system (acknowledged by the italian courts themselves) that tends to produce abuses of human rights. The system didn't change that much throughout those years (as can be seen from the 2011 statistics you mentioned, for example).

As a result of this conversation, I am wracking my brain, and scouring Google, for the piece an American wrote on the changes in the Italian legal system. It was not about the Kercher case, really, but it cited the Kercher case for how the system there is midway from moving from a full fledged inquisitorial system, to the hybrid it has now.

Apparently, and I'm doing this from memory (so take it for what it's worth) - the intent is to move Italy to a full fledged adversarial system... but the reforms got stuck in the 1990s.

My read of it - wasn't the author's point - is that it left a system with way, way, too much power in Public Minister's (prosecutor's) hands. One of the examples cited was the times that prosecutors can take theories into the courtroom, and have them evaluated as "expert theories" without much evidence supporting them. It seemed to me at the time like a doctor being recognized as an "expert witness" and thus having their opinion given better weight than someone else. She cited potential abuses for the prosecutor being recognized by the court as this kind of "expert", when those sorts of things should be left to those who actually give testimony....

This author's point was not that the Italian system was "malfunctioning", she used a different word. I am now going to have to find it - because her point was having what is essentially a hybrid system - also with the obvious judicial abuses that Italians remember from the fascist years in mind - Italy faces unique challenges in further judicial reform.

I seem to remember that as far as the Kercher trials were concerned, she was mildly an innocenter - but she wasn't writing to make a point about it, but about the system in general which produced unique "miscarriages" of justice, while still, in the main, functioning adequately.

But I'm also reminded of the people on the US News networks who comment on their own experiences in trying to do business in Italy - and I admit it is also in the context of the ISC ordering a re-appeal's trial. Gloria Allred is one who simply refuses to do business in Italy after some bad experiences - available in a Google search.

She did not say it directly, but she echo'ed the sentiment made by others - why risk doing business in Italy when the most minor of legal-squabbles can tie you up in court for years, and cost amounts of money completely out of proportion to the original offence?

Of course she was not referencing the Kercher tragedy - but still.... even the most cynical guilter has to agree that it's a very real possibility that the Florence court could re-acquit, only to have the ISC order a fourth trial in 2016.

You don't need to go to the ECHR stats to discover what's wrong with this picture. Word of mouth, like the movies, is working just fine when it comes to Italy.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill I was only pointing out that my speculations on how the defense team should be positioning Amanda is as valid (at least) as your trying to win points by quoting the PGP true crime author.

Nothing we do here will impact anything except some of Anglo's and my p) breakthroughs - message erased and Patrick's house not being searched., knives tested and his wife not arrested or at least taken in.

It would interest me what others think should be being done at this time in terms of media work but apparently only Randy and I think it is important.

I'm not touching that one with a ten-foot pole. RandyN thinks I'm into the NyQuil... so I guess we're even.

All the same, welcome back! (I think!)

 

[MDDVS]

Well I see the speedy trial as less important than a fair trial which is one of their categories. Of course you are right that it is important for the reasons you laid out and had Amanda and Raf been found innocent at the first trial as they should, the two years would have been a travesty.

I was merely pointing out that Italy's system, even when working well in terms of guilt and innocence, has systemic violations built in - length of trials.



Okay as you laid out above there is good reason for a speedy trial but it is far different than a fair trial in common perception.



Except France is worse for what are categorized as a fair trial in your linked report.



Well it does matter how you slice it. France had more violations for fair trials and that seems more important than speedy trials.

I do agree that this case was butchered by the ILE and the trial was a farce and should be in the unfair trial category.

Come on, we're talking about a difference of 251 violations of the right to a fair trial for France and 245 for Italy. It's statistical insignificant (also consider that France has a larger population). What's interesting about those numbers is how far they are from all other western european countries.

So, if anything, a comparison of the numbers of the category "right to a fair trial" supoorts the general conclusion that the italian judicial system has serious problems, because Italy and France (similar judicial system) are well above all others (in the west).

 

[MDDVS]

As a result of this conversation, I am wracking my brain, and scouring Google, for the piece an American wrote on the changes in the Italian legal system. It was not about the Kercher case, really, but it cited the Kercher case for how the system there is midway from moving from a full fledged inquisitorial system, to the hybrid it has now.

Apparently, and I'm doing this from memory (so take it for what it's worth) - the intent is to move Italy to a full fledged adversarial system... but the reforms got stuck in the 1990s.

My read of it - wasn't the author's point - is that it left a system with way, way, too much power in Public Minister's (prosecutor's) hands. One of the examples cited was the times that prosecutors can take theories into the courtroom, and have them evaluated as "expert theories" without much evidence supporting them. It seemed to me at the time like a doctor being recognized as an "expert witness" and thus having their opinion given better weight than someone else. She cited potential abuses for the prosecutor being recognized by the court as this kind of "expert", when those sorts of things should be left to those who actually give testimony....

This author's point was not that the Italian system was "malfunctioning", she used a different word. I am now going to have to find it - because her point was having what is essentially a hybrid system - also with the obvious judicial abuses that Italians remember from the fascist years in mind - Italy faces unique challenges in further judicial reform.

I seem to remember that as far as the Kercher trials were concerned, she was mildly an innocenter - but she wasn't writing to make a point about it, but about the system in general which produced unique "miscarriages" of justice, while still, in the main, functioning adequately.

But I'm also reminded of the people on the US News networks who comment on their own experiences in trying to do business in Italy - and I admit it is also in the context of the ISC ordering a re-appeal's trial. Gloria Allred is one who simply refuses to do business in Italy after some bad experiences - available in a Google search.

She did not say it directly, but she echo'ed the sentiment made by others - why risk doing business in Italy when the most minor of legal-squabbles can tie you up in court for years, and cost amounts of money completely out of proportion to the original offence?

Of course she was not referencing the Kercher tragedy - but still.... even the most cynical guilter has to agree that it's a very real possibility that the Florence court could re-acquit, only to have the ISC order a fourth trial in 2016.

You don't need to go to the ECHR stats to discover what's wrong with this picture. Word of mouth, like the movies, is working just fine when it comes to Italy.

You make some nice points here. I'd like to add that even if they make a change to a fully adversarial system that won't change one of the main weaknesses of the system. That weakness is the total lack of accountability of the judiciary which leaves too much power to the judges and in particular to the prossecutors.

And yes, word of mouth or actually having to deal with these systems is enough. It's just interesting how the structural problems are reflected in the stastistics of the ECHR.

Also, it's important to note that the actual situation is much worse than it appears because most of the people affected are usually poor or somehow socially disadvantaged so you don't hear about the cases (althougth I'm sure this is an universal problem, I also believe it's much worse in more corrupt countries like Italy, for example).

 

[Grinder]

Come on, we're talking about a difference of 251 violations of the right to a fair trial for France and 245 for Italy. It's statistical insignificant (also consider that France has a larger population). What's interesting about those numbers is how far they are from all other western european countries.

Yes. It also is interesting that France doesn't have the same level of problem with speedy trials.

So, if anything, a comparison of the numbers of the category "right to a fair trial" supoorts the general conclusion that the italian judicial system has serious problems, because Italy and France (similar judicial system) are well above all others (in the west).

I haven't disagreed with the position regarding Italy's system just that the numbers are a bit deceptive. You disagree, no problem.

I'm more concerned with this specific case but clearly there is a long history of problems in Italy.

Do you think there is a correlation with violations and wine consumption?

 

[RandyN]

Okay I understand no actual examples then. Never mind, Rose Montague and I found a couple. When you get a chance pursue this article from the BBC

No there are at least 2000 actual examples of Italy violating and being charged for crimes against the human rights of its citizens and others stuck in its web of corrupt illegitimate legal nonsense. I simply don't care to track down the actual details. Its good enough for me that the ECOHR has convicted Italy of crimes by its judiciary more than any other signatory country except for Turkey...Italy 2000 vs Spain 12. that seems a good enough pattern for me to decide about the level of honesty in the Italian judicial system. Perhaps you have an excuse for their record? Bad ECOHR judges??? Yea thats it. sigh...

In the USA felons are banned from ever voting or owning guns. Pretty sure they all mostly have guns...and always will...even after they take the guns away from the good guys...

 

[Bill Williams]

This was worth preprinting here from a blog....

Love this reply to Perugia by supporter Jim Snowden:

Dear Perugia

This’ll be brief, since we don’t actually know each other at all. But I’ve noted with some interest your effort to sever the sister city relationship you have with my town, Seattle, because Amanda Knox refuses to return to Italy for her retrial.

Now I respect your right to use your time as you like. And if you want to stay up burning lean tissue over whether Seattle and Perugia should maintain their sister city status, I wouldn’t dream of stopping you. Frankly, I couldn’t care less if our respective burgs remain sister cities or not. Still, since your reason for dropping us is Amanda Knox related and since blaming people for problems they’re not responsible for is one of your bad habits, I just want to point something out before you sign whatever proclamation you feel like signing.

Amanda Knox’s travel arrangements are not something that we, the citizens of Seattle, have any say over. She’s committed no crime here (she’s committed no crime there either, but we’ll leave that for now), so even if we had the inclination, we have no power to tell her what to do or where to go. Staying here or attending the trial is a decision for her, her family, and her legal team. They’re not obliged to consult us.

The anger over there still runs hot, Perugia, and I understand. But I think you’re misdirecting it. Your chief prosecutor botched the Kercher investigation. If you want to get mad, get mad at him. He made such a pig’s breakfast of the case that two people who did nothing wrong are stuck in an endless legal quagmire while the actual murderer, whose sentence was shortened because of your prosecutor’s blinkered insistence on conspiracy theories, will be walking your streets again in a little over a year. Now in Italy maybe it’s harder to fire a prosecutor than it is to revoke sister city status, but terminating him would be a more productive use of your sense of injustice.

But if you insist on blaming the wrong people for your problems, Perugia, it’s probably best for us if we dissolve our relationship. We have twenty other sister cities, and I’m sure we’ll find another twenty-first if you bail on us. I’m more concerned for you, because if you act this way with your other sisters, you may one day find yourselves with nothing but your paranoia to keep you company.

Your Pal,

JS

 

[RandyN]

Is Italy the worst?Article from the London Guardian

Yes its the nearly the worst...stop your tedious cherry picking...your posts are beginning to remind me of Yummi/Mac.

Look at the charts from 1959 to present...not just one year. 2166 Italian violations vs Denmark 40 , Spain 103, Ireland 27...etc.

If your going to make an argument try the typical guilter tactic of not committing yourself to facts of any sort...go with the she lied, she accused a innocent man, etc...also lies but much harder to refute....well not hard for the normal minded...but

So England has a free press...interesting. After all is said and done or so says the government I suppose. You do have a quite free tabloid press I will grant you...dont blame them for wanting to opt out of someone looking over their shoulders...hard to get away with crap as easily...

 

[RandyN]

Meredith was murdered 2007 but you wish to compare 1959 to 2011! I thought 2011 was a bit of a stretch, but 1959 – 2011?

Really? Come on give up on this!

What sort of idiotic logic is at work here?

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Overview_2011_ENG.pdf

You people need to learn how to check your stats. Not all that hard actually...my list has 2166 violations for Italy IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD when honest countries like Spain have 103 and in the same time period Denmark has 40...

You have to be kidding that somehow we have to look at 2007 to get an accurate picture???That's insane, illogical, and just plain dumb.

So Grinder we can allow Italy some slack according to you because all they mostly do is keep people wrongfully jailed for extra years all while bankrupting them with repeated appeals? How about putting a little thought into your posts. Or do think its OK for RS and AK to sit a year w/o charge? To be jailed 4 years for this incredibly stupid and insane case? To be still up to your arse in alligators after almost 6 years? And to be bankrupted and mentally tortured for possibly 6 more years? You can do better than that!

 

[Mary_H]

I don't see why the right to a speedy trial is somehow a less important right than the others. A long trial is dangerous because it can be used as a tool to destroy the live of any citizen just by accusing him of a crime. Even if you are found innocent at the end you will be finacially ruined, with your reputation destroyed and possibly even have served many years in jail by the time the final verdict comes. So I don't agree that we should look lightly at violations of the right to a speedy trial.

Incidentally, these also classify as violations to the article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the human rights convention.

It's also interesting that you mention France, which is one of the two European countries with most similar judicial systems to the italian (the other being Portugal), so no surprise here, it's just that Italy's even worse.

It doesn't matter how you slice it, Italy has one of the worst track records, and the absolute worst among Western European countries.

Italy’s 'crazy' judicial system in 'critical state'

An analyst at the OECD told The Local on Friday that Italy’s legal system is in a “critical situation”, as a report by the organization shows that it takes an average of more than 1,000 days for a case to go through the country's highest court.

“Italy stands out in various areas as being in a critical situation,” Giuseppe Nicoletti, head of the OECD’s Structural Policy Analysis Division, told The Local on Friday.

“In all stages of judgements, [Italy] always has the longest duration. In Switzerland a case takes 400 days to go through the three courts (court of first instance, appeal court and supreme court) but in Italy it takes 1,000 days [for each of the two appeals]. It’s crazy,” Nicoletti said.

The analyst spoke to The Local on the day the OECD’s ‘What Makes Civil Justice Effective?’ report was presented in Rome, which compared the legal systems of 31 OECD countries as well as those of Russia and South Africa.

And Italy came bottom of the table in terms of the time it takes for a case to conclude in the courts.
Researchers found that the trial length in the court of first instance takes an average of 564 days in Italy, compared to the OECD average of 240 days. In comparison in Japan proceedings in trial last for an average of 107 days.

 

[anglolawyer]

Justice delayed is justice denied they say. Aside from delay there is a whole host of problems touching the fairness of the proceedings to date including interrogation without caution or legal assistance (probably by some measure the most important) non-disclosure (a clear second) and use of the memoriale, most recently by the ISC in tying Amanda's recollection of the scream to the ear witnesses, to name but three.

On Grinder's and my own case-busting points, I don't think the deleted text has anything other than academic interest and majoring on the cops' selection of the knife would mark a big change of strategy because it implies corruption and hitherto, for good or ill, the defence has refrained from going that far. However, the two books might have committed them to something like this - Amanda calls a couple of cops liars and Raffaele wrote of 'judicial BS' and hinted at a cynical deal to let him walk if he nailed her, implying a somewhat less than principled prosecution. The re-run promises to be extremely interesting.