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

[JREF2010]

Ok I wasn't aware CNN is regarded as anti-Amanda.

I was more interested with his comments about the possible extradition process.

It was CNN who captured Migninni saying the Interrogation wasn't recorded due to budget cuts. That was kind of pro-Defense...

 

[acbytesla]

I can't help but wonder if it is schadenfreude that drives so many of the guilters. That this insane and illogical behavior is the manifestation of individuals that enjoy other people's misfortune. They seem like the crowds that gathered at London Tower or the Roman Coliseum to fulfill their thirst.

 

[Mary_H]

Ok I wasn't aware CNN is regarded as anti-Amanda.

I was more interested with his comments about the possible extradition process.

The key point he made was, "If the American people support her, the President and the State Department are not going to send her back."

 

[Mary_H]

A "judicial fact" is simply the thing closest to what is actually factual that you can get from a trial. In a trial you only find "judicial truth" or "judicial facts". You will never get anything closer to the "truth" than that (it is just not reasonable to aim to "absolute truths" at all stages in human justice systems; a trial is not a phylosophy research session). (The irony is that even Hellmann "agrees"!) And the path towards the truth must be reached through rules of a game between two or more parties. The process in fact is logical. The conclusion about the truth is the consequence of logical mechanisms which are embedded in the rules.

Does this apply to the defendants as well as the witnesses? You suggest judges are eager to accept witness testimony unless there is good reason to rule it out. Why have some judges been less eager to accept defendant testimony by the same standard?

 

[Bill Williams]

Does this apply to the defendants as well as the witnesses? You suggest judges are eager to accept witness testimony unless there is good reason to rule it out. Why have some judges been less eager to accept defendant testimony by the same standard?

Because in Italy defendants are expected to lie.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Start Making Sense

This link was posted on PMF, Paul Callan CNN

Callan gets an important fact wrong. Amanda and Raffaele were not convicted on the "testimony of an accomplice." A talking head should be able to do better. He is getting paid for his appearance; he should have a better grasp on the case. The comparison to Whitey Bulger is just plain vanilla silly.

 

[Mary_H]

Because in Italy defendants are expected to lie.

Witnesses don't take an oath either, though, right?

If they want to go by the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," they should disabuse themselves of being okay with lying. Of course, that will take some doing, given the entire culture seems infused with it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Apologies, CoulsdonUK - I forgot Chris Cuomo.

Chris Cuomo did the best impersonation of a guilter in his CNN slapping of Amanda Knox. There were times where he was obnoxious and rude, but Knox has more than likely experienced worse.

No one could accuse CNN (through Chris Cuomo) particularly of giving either Raffaele or Amanda a free ride. They've provided a platform, and in time trested them rather roughly.

At the end of the day, I think Chris Cuomo ended up like John Follain, at least Follain as revealed in his book, "A Death in Italy." Both Cuomo and Follain gave it the good old college try to make Amanda seem guilty... play to the image of Foxy Knoxy and all that immature behaviour.... but at the end of the day both of these (bullies?) seem to come away with, "She's probably innocent."

I don't know what Follain, for instance, thinks now. But I did judge, by looking at a photograph of him, that he probably thinks Amanda innocent.

But does CNN think she's innocent? That's a different question than if CNN is "pro- or anti-Amanda.

I'm looking for the time when this is judged on the evidence. CNN's Jeffery Toobin tends to do that, and he has repeatedly said that there is no evidence even suggesting that they might have been involved.

I'd like to see Toobin, Morgan, Nadeau, Burnett, and Anderson in a room together and listen to what they come up with.

 

[Bill Williams]

Callan gets an important fact wrong. Amanda and Raffaele were not convicted on the "testimony of an accomplice." A talking head should be able to do better. He is getting paid for his appearance; he should have a better grasp on the case. The comparison to Whitey Bulger is just plain vanilla silly.

I noted that as well......

 

[Mary_H]

Callan gets an important fact wrong. Amanda and Raffaele were not convicted on the "testimony of an accomplice." A talking head should be able to do better. He is getting paid for his appearance; he should have a better grasp on the case. The comparison to Whitey Bulger is just plain vanilla silly.

It's absurd, and Erin was wrong to call it fair. This CNN article shows there are no similarities between his case and Amanda's.

The motion breaks down Bulger's spoils that were spelled out in testimony from gangsters, former associates, drug dealers, convicted felons, and extortion victims during more than 41 days of trial this summer....

In 2011, Bulger was found hiding out in Santa Monica, California, with his girlfriend -- and with nearly $822,000 in cash, 30 guns, some loaded, and an assortment of knives and a Taser.

 

[Grinder]

The kiosk would be winding down its paper selling that late. The rail where the couple looked over cannot be seen by someone in the Kiosk. Cheap shot about Meredith who dated only one boy in Perugia.

What cheap shot. The early police leaks to the media stated that she had had consensual sex and they suspected that she had met her killer at a party the night before. One of the reasons given for not testing the "semen" stain was her sexual activity.

How could you possibly know how many men she dated in Perugia.

Stories abound about Amanda that have nothing to do with the crime that you don't object to but reporting what was in the press and the court report is wrong.

Officers think Meredith Kercher, 21, left three flatmates to go home alone after watching a film on the night she was murdered because she had arranged to see a man she had met the previous night at a Hallowe'en party.

Police said last night there were indications that she had sex before she was stabbed in the neck. Her attacker locked the bedroom door before fleeing the house and dumping her two mobile phones in a nearby garden.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Ok I wasn't aware CNN is regarded as anti-Amanda.

I was more interested with his comments about the possible extradition process.

Callan ignored how the CSC turned itself into an arbiter of facts. I don't have a strong opinion on how likely extradition is. However, here is a link to a blog entry with some helpful commentary.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>I'd like to see Toobin, Morgan, Nadeau, Burnett, and Anderson in a room together and listen to what they come up with.

I would like to see all of them interview Matteini, Mignini, Comodi and Massei, since the essence of every interview with Amanda seems to be, "Yes, but why were you arrested? Yes, but why were you arrested? Yes, but why were you arrested?"

 

[Grinder]

I can't help but wonder if it is schadenfreude that drives so many of the guilters. That this insane and illogical behavior is the manifestation of individuals that enjoy other people's misfortune. They seem like the crowds that gathered at London Tower or the Roman Coliseum to fulfill their thirst.

You're just figuring that out?

That's why I'v been calling .org and .net schadenfreude.com/net.

They not only wish ill will on the defendants and their families but anyone associated with them. You should have seen their joy when Anne Bremner was cited for DUI. They even cheered the loss by Mike Heavy's son in an election.

 

[Grinder]

It was CNN who captured Migninni saying the Interrogation wasn't recorded due to budget cuts. That was kind of pro-Defense...

Agreed. I don't think the interviews were anti Knox. I think she needs to control the interviews and dismiss the Foxy Knoxy stuff and bring the interview to the bad evidence and her innocence.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

probably not blood

What did they have to show positive in your opinion

Most likely something with a transition metal ion. I think that the prints are unlikely to have been made in blood. Besides the negative TMB test and the lack of an essential confirmatory test, there is the fact that something on a boot also gave a positive result, as can be seen in an appropriate photograph. Most problematic for the prosecution's claim is that there is one shoe print in the hallway and one footprint in Amanda's room: The footprint in Amanda's room does not match her reference print at the second toe. Rinaldi was not able to match the shoe print to any shoe he had. That gives us one unidentified barefoot woman and one unidentified person wearing shoes. Given all of the information available about Amanda, Raffaele, and Rudy, it is therefore unlikely that the prints were made on the night of 1 November. If they were not made on the night of the murder, they are probably not blood.

One problem that has not received the attention that it deserves is that the luminol was applied very heavily.

 

[Mary_H]

Callan ignored how the CSC turned itself into an arbiter of facts. I don't have a strong opinion on how likely extradition is. However, here is a link to a blog entry with some helpful commentary.

This is a great link, Chris; have you posted it before? Did you notice "Karl Popper" in the comments? I presume that is the Popper we know from you-know-where.

I liked this comment, which says what Callan said -- that extradition is a political act, not a judicial one:

Jack Butler Says:
February 25th, 2012 at 4:19 pm

Extradition requests are made from executive branches to executive branches, not judiciary to judiciary. If it were the latter, the interpretation of the law itself would be a prime driver.

Obviously, the judiciaries would prefer to be dominant, in such matters. The fact that they are not allows for political factors to be taken into consideration. (In contrast, a European Arrest Warrant excludes executive branch involvement.)
(...)
So, that puts the Italian executive branch on the spot. Will it risk the probable loss of face of having the U.S. turn them down?

 

[Grinder]

Glass is effective at blocking sound but pretty good at letting light through. Only the north wall on that kiosk is not glass.

Thanks Dan O.

It is interesting that only Curatolo could see the kids. Costumed kids all over the place waiting for buses that weren't running, regular kiosk customers of the kiosk and the kiosk employee yet not a one saw the highly unusual couple, how strange. He saw but couldn't hear the horrific scream that penetrated through walls and double-paned windows because of the highway like traffic, but that same traffic didn't stop Nara and even the later arriving neighbor from hearing footsteps and even being able to discern gravel from pavement.

Yes, yes, the traffic was heavy and loud. No , no it wasn't heavy and loud. Depends on what is being contended by the same person.

 

[Grinder]

There's a reason why PMF posts that. Here's simply another person making a personality assessment of someone they've never met based on a media source. The guy in the video is more than likely 100% sincere in his own personal reaction to someone who is dissecting her method of communication, and coming up with his opinion that she's an "ice queen", or "wouldn't make a good witness in her own behalf."

I think you and others here can't see the elephant in the room. She is a lousy spokesperson for herself. Many here deny what she herself admits, such as that she could remember details of the evening and night.

He may not know diddly about the case but he still can see how her performances impact him and that is significant.

That is why I would use her as a spokesperson on the YT video campaign.

My hope is that everyone can get past those sorts of excruciatingly subjective observations. Erin Burnett should have asked a follow-up question to the fellow; "Do you think it's fair to judge someone like that?"

Bill of all people you should know that life isn't fair.

 

[Mary_H]

Callan ignored how the CSC turned itself into an arbiter of facts. I don't have a strong opinion on how likely extradition is. However, here is a link to a blog entry with some helpful commentary.

Most comments are from 2011 and 2012 -- it's interesting to see lawyers discussing what might happen with Cassazione before it actually happened -- although I see Harry Rag managed to get in there at the end, just last week, lol.

I find this comment by Popper interesting:

Karl Popper Says:
June 3rd, 2012 at 3:25 pm

I also understand your argument but Article VI was signed to avoid prosecuting a person for the same crime in 2 different countries. The defendants were never tried for this murder in the USA (the “requested party”) so the US cannot refuse extradition if we stick to the treaty. Politics is another matter; I agree with the conclusion of the writer of the article, Ryan Scoville: “if the United States were to decline an Italian request for extradition after reinstatement of the conviction and sentence, we would be doing so in contravention of international law.” Politics would cause breach of International law.

Nothing about the breaches of Italian law that were required in order to prosecute the defendants?