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

[CoulsdonUK]

As I said, at the end of the day, C&V gave up trying to get anything from Stefanoni, issued the report castigating her work, and the judge precluded Stefanoni from getting any more documents into the record.

And yes, it seems to me that the judge could have rung her up, but he abstained because he knew that she was going to get nailed, and so disciplining her wouldn't matter anyway.

Don't you agree that the prosecution should fork over all of the heretobefore-withheld records? Seems to me that that has to happen.

I believe the process is the defence submit their appeal against the 1st level verdict, therefore it is up to them to ask the right questions or request the right items of evidence such as the EDF’s; during the opening phase of the appeal the defence and the prosecution argue their points and the judge makes a ruling. It is up to the judge after making a ruling to ensure requested information is produced in a timely fashion and if it isn’t apply the appropriate sanction, again Hellmann didn’t do this, but hey blame Stefanoni because of Hellmann’s weakness as a judge.

 

[Diocletus]

His most important home was Piazza Grimana not a busy place where he observed the defendants , A place where anyone new or acting in an unusual manner would stand out to someone so familiar with the space.

So I guess he would have noticed a scream?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Presumably yes, but the fact that Hellman tolerated the contempt shows just how far he bent over backwards to maintain the pretence that the prosecution had some legitimacy. The other violation he allowed was to uphold Amanda's conviction for callunia against Lumumba, on the basis of statements obtained by the police in a grossly irregular way.

We can only imagine that he aimed to do the minimum possible in going against the prosecution, and still let the students go free. It's not a given that the next court will be so eager to appease the Mignini crew, particularly as it's now clear that Hellman's appeasement had so little effect.

Based on posts here it is not unreasonable to conclude that Hellmann allowed contempt of his court and as such was a weak judge who for whatever reason did not use the sanctions at his disposal. Can you imagine a judge in the UK instructing a Home Office pathologist to handover EDF’s and pathologist responds with “no your honour you don’t need them” and the judge saying oh right okay then what can you give me! This is what you are all defending, remarkable.

Anyway, you guys carry on blaming Stefanoni and Mignini, Hellmann did a great job.

 

[Diocletus]

Strawman? Is that you again?

You think the EDFs should be produced?

 

[Briars]

His most important home was Piazza Grimana not a busy place where he observed the defendants , A place where anyone new or acting in an unusual manner would stand out to someone so familiar with the space.

While the piazza itself isn't busy the kiosk is near a busy traffic stop. Four lanes funnel into that intersection next to the square, The other thing to note is although the gate is clearly visible from the rail the drive and cottage were not. In fact a 3 story building and dense trees blocked the cottage from the Piazza and would muffle any sounds that might have been heard.This is why it makes sense that Curatolo was not startled by the scream. Nara's window faced the cottage with nothing in the way. A scream would have echoed in the valley and traveled straight to her closed window.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Strawman? Is that you again?

You think the EDFs should be produced?

If a judge has ruled that certain evidence should be produced then it is up to the judge to ensure her\his ruling is acted upon, do you dispute this?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

If a judge has ruled that certain evidence should be produced then it is up to the judge to ensure her\his ruling is acted upon, do you dispute this?

I think you just changed the subject. The question was about what ought to be done, not about whose responsibility it is to bang heads and make sure it gets done.

 

[Bill Williams]

While the piazza itself isn't busy the kiosk is near a busy traffic stop. Four lanes funnel into that intersection next to the square, The other thing to note is although the gate is clearly visible from the rail the drive and cottage were not. In fact a 3 story building and dense trees blocked the cottage from the Piazza and would muffle any sounds that might have been heard.This is why it makes sense that Curatolo was not startled by the scream. Nara's window faced the cottage with nothing in the way. A scream would have echoed in the valley and traveled straight to her closed window.

This is a serious attempt to find them guilty no matter what. A scream like that would have been heard by others, including Curatolo. Unless what you're arguing is that the valley was concave enough to focus it directly at Nara's window, to the exclusion of other locations. And you also don't deal with that Nara cannot really say if the scream happened on Oct 31 or Nov 1, and that she wasn't found as a witness until months later. Also, that she was being talked about as a witness by the police BEFORE she was interviewed by police. The police heard her on TV.

Sorry to say it, but this is a desperate simply to say something guilt-like. (And boy will my face be red when you post your echolocation study from the University of Perugia physics department!)

 

[Bill Williams]

I think you just changed the subject. The question was about what ought to be done, not about whose responsibility it is to bang heads and make sure it gets done.

Also remember that the Hellmann court did, in fact, acquit the pair. There's no mention in the Hellmann report about the role not producing things played, but you have to think that an uncooperative Scientific Police person like Stefanoni was not far from Hellmann's mind when he acquitted.

Maybe he was waiting to see what the ISC did with his acquittal before charging Stefanoni with contempt of court. I mean, can Stefanoni charge Hellmman and Zanetti with defamation for the insult of being charged with contempt of court?

In Italy, all things seem possible if you can get the ISC to sign off on it.

For my conspiratorial little mind, I agree with the assessment upthread that Hellmann wanted to split the difference - he wanted to acquit obviously innocent people, while still being seen as a team player within this judicial club which seems to protect itself at all costs.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

All Stefanoni had to do was say, "Here you go."

I believe the process is the defence submit their appeal against the 1st level verdict, therefore it is up to them to ask the right questions or request the right items of evidence such as the EDF’s; during the opening phase of the appeal the defence and the prosecution argue their points and the judge makes a ruling. It is up to the judge after making a ruling to ensure requested information is produced in a timely fashion and if it isn’t apply the appropriate sanction, again Hellmann didn’t do this, but hey blame Stefanoni because of Hellmann’s weakness as a judge.

The defense asked for full forensic disclosure during the trial of first instance, as is evidenced by Carlo dalla Vedova's interview in 2011, by Bongiorno's motion in 2009, by Amanda Knox's book, etc. I see no reason to absolve Ms. Stefanoni of blame for failing in what she should know is her professional responsiblity.

Candace Dempsey wrote, "Exasperated, he sent her a handwritten note on April 14, 2011. It ordered Stefanoni to send every file requested by his independent experts, Drs. Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, from Rome’s Sapienza University. They want to trace exactly how she achieved her results in the (then) unaccredited Roman police lab. The defense has argued that the samples, found on the alleged murder weapon and a bra clasp, were either too scanty or resulted from contamination. She testified that the DNA traces were ample enough and that contamination has never occurred in the Rome crime lab."

Ms. Stefanoni sent a fax saying in part, "In reference to the request of acquisition of CD RAW DATA, one is obligated to explain that the information in the form of this file in the sequencer is never an integral part of the technical report, as far as the object being tested by the forensic geneticist, namely the DNA profile, and that it is already reported in the electropherogram printout, connected to the technical report on which all of the useful date and an evaluation of the genetic profile are reported."

What utter nonsense! Every practicing forensic geneticist whom I have interviewed stressed that until he or she sees the raw data, the case review is not complete.

Do you think that Stefanoni's lab should produce the raw data and other data that they have withheld?

 

[Diocletus]

If a judge has ruled that certain evidence should be produced then it is up to the judge to ensure her\his ruling is acted upon, do you dispute this?

Nope. Now that we've agreed on that, lets back up.

Stefanoni is a state investigator, clothed with the power of the state but also subject to its obligations with respect to criminal defendants.

She produces a report and provides with it a set of backing data. Except, unbeknownst to the defendants, the report and backing data is incomplete because stefanoni has suppressed from the data certain information unfavorable to the prosecution.

This is outrageous, and while we can criticize both masses and Hellman for the sin of not enforcing full disclosure, the original violation is stefanoni's suppression if exculpatory evidence: an offense against justice.

Btw, the exact same thing happened in the duke lacrosse case and the prosecutor was disbarred and went to jail.

Why will you not respond to the question of whether this data should be produced?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I think you just changed the subject. The question was about what ought to be done, not about whose responsibility it is to bang heads and make sure it gets done.

No I haven’t changed the subject, like everyone else here I have answered in the manner of my choosing which is to point out the weakness of Hellmann, given the simple fact that the EDF’s were not produced.

 

[Bill Williams]

No I haven’t changed the subject, like everyone else here I have answered in the manner of my choosing which is to point out the weakness of Hellmann, given the simple fact that the EDF’s were not produced.

OK. But the question is - do you believe Stefanoni should have produced them?

The answer of my choosing is - yes.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

The defense asked for full forensic disclosure during the trial of first instance, as is evidenced by Carlo dalla Vedova's interview in 2011, by Bongiorno's motion in 2009, by Amanda Knox's book, etc. I see no reason to absolve Ms. Stefanoni of blame for failing in what she should know is her professional responsiblity.

Candace Dempsey wrote, "Exasperated, he sent her a handwritten note on April 14, 2011. It ordered Stefanoni to send every file requested by his independent experts, Drs. Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, from Rome’s Sapienza University. They want to trace exactly how she achieved her results in the (then) unaccredited Roman police lab. The defense has argued that the samples, found on the alleged murder weapon and a bra clasp, were either too scanty or resulted from contamination. She testified that the DNA traces were ample enough and that contamination has never occurred in the Rome crime lab."

Ms. Stefanoni sent a fax saying in part, "In reference to the request of acquisition of CD RAW DATA, one is obligated to explain that the information in the form of this file in the sequencer is never an integral part of the technical report, as far as the object being tested by the forensic geneticist, namely the DNA profile, and that it is already reported in the electropherogram printout, connected to the technical report on which all of the useful date and an evaluation of the genetic profile are reported."

What utter nonsense! Every practicing forensic geneticist whom I have interviewed stressed that until he or she sees the raw data, the case review is not complete.

Do you think that Stefanoni's lab should produce the raw data and other data that they have withheld?

Simply, I believe if a witness is instructed by the court to produce evidence it should be produced and if it isn’t then the judge has the authority to take whatever action she\he wishes. I have not stated the Stefanoni should be absolved, Hellmann did that!

 

[Briars]

This is a serious attempt to find them guilty no matter what. A scream like that would have been heard by others, including Curatolo. Unless what you're arguing is that the valley was concave enough to focus it directly at Nara's window, to the exclusion of other locations. And you also don't deal with that Nara cannot really say if the scream happened on Oct 31 or Nov 1, and that she wasn't found as a witness until months later. Also, that she was being talked about as a witness by the police BEFORE she was interviewed by police. The police heard her on TV.

Sorry to say it, but this is a desperate simply to say something guilt-like. (And boy will my face be red when you post your echolocation study from the University of Perugia physics department!)

Nara wasn't the only witness who heard noise or a scream. Google Piazza Grimana on utube you can hear and see the traffic ,the trees and the large building near the piazza blocking the cottage. Nara's window has nothing in front of it, you can hear dogs barking below the cottage from the parking lot. Then try give a thoughtful post that doesn't include words like desperate or you want them 'to be guilty', can you do that Bill?If not not to worry perhaps a sound study is in order. Maybe the upcoming British tv show might include something.

 

[codyjuneau]

Simply, I believe if a witness is instructed by the court to produce evidence it should be produced and if it isn’t then the judge has the authority to take whatever action she\he wishes. I have not stated the Stefanoni should be absolved, Hellmann did that!

.
So you do believe Stefanoni should have produced the EDFS as Hellmann instructed her to do. That is reasonable, thank you.
.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

OK. But the question is - do you believe Stefanoni should have produced them?

The answer of my choosing is - yes.

For me Hellmann is responsible, he asked for the EDF’s Stefanoni didn’t produce them and Hellmann allowed it, for me it’s not a question of should it happen, but why didn’t happen.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the missing egrams

No I haven’t changed the subject, like everyone else here I have answered in the manner of my choosing which is to point out the weakness of Hellmann, given the simple fact that the EDF’s were not produced.

Stefanoni apparently did not even produce all of the electropherograms. How could the defense know of their existence, in order to request them? This is the same Stefanoni who reported falsely with respect to the TMB results and with respect to the amount of DNA from the knife electropherogram.

 

[Diocletus]

For me Hellmann is responsible, he asked for the EDF’s Stefanoni didn’t produce them and Hellmann allowed it, for me it’s not a question of should it happen, but why didn’t happen.

At the end of the day, what you are going to find is that the state has an obligation to provide a fair trial. Part of that obligation is to disclose, and certainly not to suppress exculpatory evidence. When a fair trial has been denied in this manner, it does not matter whether it is by action of deceitful prosecutors or ineffective judges. On either case it is a violation of a very fundamental right.

I find your obfuscation and refusal to acknowledge that the EDFs should be produced to be most disingenuous and indicative of someone who hasn't the understanding or care for fundamental fairness and justice and truth. Good day, sir.

 

[Diocletus]

Stefanoni apparently did not even produce all of the electropherograms. How could the defense know of their existence, in order to request them? This is the same Stefanoni who reported falsely with respect to the TMB results and with respect to the amount of DNA from the knife electropherogram.

Speaking of which, I just identified some more egrams that S suppressed. 2 of them from the bra. Isn't that interesting? Two artifact-ridden unidentifiable egrams from the bra.