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

[RandyN]

Here is that dude in the yellow outfit.....

http://editorial.milestonemedia.it/item/en/1/700610

Thanks Rose...you are the Hans of JREF. I forgot the orange pants...I was thinking it was (two cows must die) brown leather. Too heavy I suppose...he must have taken his huge floppy shoes off. Still has the huge red nose...wait.

 

[RandyN]

I suspect, more than anything else, that was what was responsible for their whole investigation going downhill. They saw the window and figured climbing it too difficult, obviously not realizing like a burglar would the crossbars on the window beneath it served as a ladder. That and the fact (as far as we know) only Meredith's purse was plundered caused them to start looking at those with keys, fixing their gaze inexorably upon the residents until sometime around when they wiretapped them and checked their phone records they came across the text message Patrick had sent her that she hadn't told them about that could be read to suggest she went to meet him....[/QUOTE

Well Sure.

You couldn't get Mignini or Profazio up to that window without a huge industrial crane. Unless he thought he might be able to peer into a womans prison cell from his bedroom window. Wait.

 

[RandyN]

Sorry but I don't believe I said that but since this has been going round for so long... In fact I'll grant you that Mignini didn't say it "on the record."

What I said was that it really doesn't make a difference to me whether it was a satanic rite or ritual or just a rite or a sex game - I don't see evidence of any of them. Do you?

Now what I did ask you to explain how completely disgraced judges' verdicts can stand. How can the judgment on calunnia be accepted when it is obvious to you and the ISC that Hellmann's court was not competent.

I dont know if I said it or not. But Barbie said it so it must be true. Lets ask Vogt...she will know. I bet he said it. If I thought it worth my time I would research this because it sure did waddle and quack like a duck...A Mason Red Rose Carlizzi duck.

 

[RandyN]

Machiavelli says that Mignini was only ever at the cottage on November 2nd. But Profazio testifies that he and Mignini had returned to the cottage on April 23rd. This gives the appearance that Machiavelli has some motive for being here other than to convey the truth.



I bet Mach is wrong. I bet Mignini was at the cottage more than once. I bet that is him in the bunny suit. I bet he is holding the camera. Did he leak photos? Who knows but he was in charge and thus responsible for anyone that did leak photos. How exactly does some odd group become copyright holders of crime scene photos in Italy? Sounds like a mafia scam to me... the police mafia that is.

 

[Antony]

"violently"... I only reply to plain falsehoods.

...

... and not to awkward questions.

 

[Antony]

I see evidence of a sexual violence; and I see evidence of multiple perpetrators; I also see evidence of Amanda Knox's involvement, and of Sollecito's.
I also see evidence that the crime was committed by someone under drug effect and that all three were on drugs that night.
I also see evidence that all three had contacts with drug dealers and had - each one in a different way - some issue regarding their sexual conduct. And also they had some relation with violence or violent fantasies and knifes.



This question makes sense.
In fact, out of my legal knowledge, I did expect the Supreme Court to crush the verdicts completely, but out of my logical sense, I did not expect them to accept the calunnia conviction (while only nullifying the lack of aggravating circumstance).
But, I acknowledge that the decision is sound and logical under a legal point of view. The technical reason in fact is that it does not rest strictly on Hellmann 'competence' (side observation: thecnically, in the legal lexicon, Hellmann's court was 'competent', because 'competent' in legalese means 'it has jurisdiction' on it). In fact, paradoxically, the calunnia conviction could be reviewed if it was proven that Hellmann was corrupt; in that case, the Supreme Court could declare their guilty verdict subject to review (they can't declare it null, but they could appoint another panel that would review the decision and may theoretically overturn it; as it happens in the US for case reviews too). But if Hellmann's decision was just wrongly motivated, well, here we come to the point of why the actual decision of the Supreme Court was sound and logical. Because the Supreme Court decides upon a recours, which consists in reasons and arguments, presented in written and oral form.
It does not rule on Hellmann's verdict. In fact, even Hellmann is itself an appeal court and Massei is the first instance convicting court; the calunnia is discussed by Hellmann court only on the defence's request, and it is discussed by the Supreme Court only on the defence recourse.
Thus, the Supreme Court does not rule directly on whether Hellmann court is good or bad, but on whether a party's reasons for compleint are good or bad.

The calunnia conviction stands not because Hellmann's court was "competent", but because the reasons provided by Ghirga-Dalla Vedova against the calunnia conviction were inconsistent. Devoid of merit, unfounded, inadmissible or wrong, anyway ineffective.
And indeed their reasons were flimsy and doomed, as I explained in my report about the High Court hearing.

Paradoxically, if Ghirga-Dalla Vedova argued on grounds of bias or suspicion of corruption of Hellmann, they might have won. I can't say that for sure but who knows.

Is this your answer to my long-standing question about how (according to the ISC) Hellman allegedly erred in law in acquitting the defendants of the main charges?

I don't see where the answer is.

 

[davefoc]

...

Thank you to the thoughtful answers to my questions Machiavelli.

My recollection now is that it was Barcroft that held the copyright.

The situation is interesting, even if it doesn't go exactly to the issue of Sollecito/Knox guilt or innocence. As I recall, the Italian law with regard to this was that the pictures taken by the official police photographer would have been in the public domain if they were ever officially released. So by what means did Barcroft acquire a copyright on these pictures? A few possibilities:
1. The pictures that Barcroft owns the copyright to were taken by somebody other than the official police photographer.
2. The files for the official police photographer were illicitly copied by somebody and transmitted to Barcroft who claimed a copyright on the photos without a legally justifiable reason. The individual that illegally copies a file copyrighted or not can't transfer a copyright to the buyer because he doesn't hold one.
3. The files were transferred to Barcroft by a police or prosecution official that used the power of his office to transfer a copyright to Barcroft, perhaps in return for remuneration of questionable legality.

Do you believe that Barcroft obtained the images and claimed a copyright in some other way than I have described above. If so what are your thoughts on this? Do you think if somebody other than a police or prosecution official had transferred crime scene images to Barcroft there would have been an investigation?

 

[Antony]

It's false. This will remain a plain falsehood. Quite obvious actually (to anyone with little understanding of the law).
No matter how you attempt to repeat it.
False.

Machiavelli, the difference between you (and your friends at PMF) on the one hand, and Knox-Sollecito supporters on the other, is that the innocence supporters are generally able to back up their claims with facts - whereas you, like in the post quoted, rely on bald assertions (sometimes padded out at considerable length) without specifics.

That is why you will never convince any neutral observer.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Those 'mistranslations' must have been the work of the polizia di stato in Perugia, not the Italian press or American and British tabloids. Follain quoted a wildly distorted 'translation' of Amanda's story that changed the end of the story from two brothers fighting to a implying a graphic rape scene by changing the name Edgar to the pronoun 'her.' It was included in a fashion that suggested Amanda's parents were lying about the content of the story. I have difficulty believing that he'd do that if he didn't think he had an official source for that 'version' of the story.

That was the June 15th, 2008 Sunday Times article that was used as the vehicle to file charges against Amanda's parents.

I'd guess the main culprit behind the rash of utter nonsense produced by the press was the Perugian polizia di stato, not the Italian, British and American press--or even the prosecutor's office.

In the case of the diary, how would the media even know it existed? The police confiscated it from Amanda and had it in their possession. They controlled what went out to the public. The role of the prosecutor's office is anyone's guess.

As for Follain, someone may have been given him a corrupted text of Amanda's short story, but he has no real excuse, because the original was posted on the Internet for the entire world to see. After reading his book, I would not be at all surprised if he changed it himself.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>In doing a google search on what the heck a "multi-level-personality" is, it turns out everyone has one - we all have differing personalities when we're at home, as opposed to work, in social situations or alone with a book.

But then there's this from Dec 6, 2007, from Italy Magazine, where even before the second search of the cottage - when the bra-clasp was found kicked around the floor - business people were complaining that their fair town, Perugia, was being tarnished by the press coverage and the hype over the murder:

http://www.italymagazine.com/italy/umbria/perugia-s-image-tarnished-media-hype-over-murder

Thanks for the link, Bill. This article concurs with Machiavelli's claim that it was the court/judge, not the prosecutor, who described the defendants' psychology, but it is not from the original Matteini report of November 9th, it is from the motivations released the first week in December, the one denying bail or house arrest.

The subject of the article is interesting:

According to five associations representing artisans, retailers, farmers, businessmen and industrialists, the image of this medieval city has been ''devastated and degraded'' by the national and international media coverage of the death of 22-year-old Meredith Kercher just over a month ago.

''The portrait painted of our city is totally wrong and in no way reflects the reality here,'' the groups said in a joint statement.

http://www.italymagazine.com/italy/...d-media-hype-over-murder#sthash.bhuikeAA.dpuf

Apparently these people did not agree that even the Italian press coverage was positive or neutral.

 

[Mary_H]

Do we need to get lives?

Wow, this is eerie -- in looking for some other information, I was taken to a page of this thread from October 16, 2011 (exactly two years ago), and I find we were talking basically about exactly the same things we were talking about yesterday. charlatan and bri1, you're there (I mention it because you guys don't post that often but you've been here this week, too).

For example, here is Mach:

Note how her hand written note contains accustions against Raffaele which are purposely written: If she actually thought ha had only "fish blood" on his hands, she would not write about it into a paper to be given to the police who are investigating Raffaele for murder; if you are not sure about your memory and think it is nothing just fish blood, you don't create the danger of casting further suspicion on an innocent;...

 

[acbytesla]

Related to Mignini or Machiavelli??

The following story made me think of Machiavelli and Mignini and their obsession with the Masons.


The shutdown of the government shutdown sent one woman into meltdown mode.
The ranting woman, reportedly a House stenographer, unleashed a bizarre tirade Wednesday night — just as the chamber hurriedly voted to pass a bill to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling.

Security officers quickly escorted her out of the House chamber following the outburst — which invoked God and the Freemasons.
“He will not be mocked! He will not be mocked!” the woman raved as she stepped onto the dais andtook over the microphone on the House floor.

“Don’t touch me!” she cried as the officers started to pull her away by the arms.
“This is not one nation under God. It never was,” she said. “Had it been ... the Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons, they go against God."
Of the 39 men who signed the Constitution, 13 were reportedly Freemasons.

“You cannot serve two masters!” she finished, leaving members and staffers stunned.
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said the stenographer is a familiar and liked figure in the House, The Washington Post reported.
The bizarre speech came as Congress passed an eleventh-hour deal to avert a disastrous default by the U.S. government on its debts.

 

[xinonix]

Why wasn't Rudy in Jail Nov. 1 ?

During October Rudy did some things and got caught. By the end of October he was in jail. The jail received a phone call and they let Rudy go.
Does anyone know who issued the order to release Rudy?

 

[Diocletus]

I see evidence of a sexual violence; and I see evidence of multiple perpetrators; I also see evidence of Amanda Knox's involvement, and of Sollecito's.
I also see evidence that the crime was committed by someone under drug effect and that all three were on drugs that night.
I also see evidence that all three had contacts with drug dealers and had - each one in a different way - some issue regarding their sexual conduct. And also they had some relation with violence or violent fantasies and knifes.

Well, the perverts on the supreme court saw the same thing, so at least you have some company there.

In fact, paradoxically, the calunnia conviction could be reviewed if it was proven that Hellmann was corrupt; in that case, the Supreme Court could declare their guilty verdict subject to review (they can't declare it null, but they could appoint another panel that would review the decision and may theoretically overturn it; as it happens in the US for case reviews too). But if Hellmann's decision was just wrongly motivated, well, here we come to the point of why the actual decision of the Supreme Court was sound and logical.

The supreme court's verdict is obviously "wrongly motivated," since it reinvented the facts, which was beyond its mandate to do. In fact, the supreme court acted beyond the scope of its competence by making new findings of fact that are actually contrary to those decided by the lower fact-finding court.

Further, the supreme court issued a politically-motivated, unlawful decision, showing that it is both corrupt and incompetent. Did those perverts actually go to law school?

 

[bri1]

Wow, this is eerie -- in looking for some other information, I was taken to a page of this thread from October 16, 2011 (exactly two years ago), and I find we were talking basically about exactly the same things we were talking about yesterday. charlatan and bri1, you're there (I mention it because you guys don't post that often but you've been here this week, too).

For example, here is Mach:

Thanks for the name-check, Mary! I read most of what happens on the thread, and try and contribute when I feel I can add something useful (or I get too angry not to say anything!) And I'm glad you found my explanations about Amanda's statements coherent.
It doesn't surprise me that I was part of a similar conversation 2 years ago, and even less surprised that Mach was also involved! I think Mach just doesn't get that psychological assessments whether made by commentators or prosecution, have to at least be compatible with our best scientific understanding of human behaviour. All too often, people believe that they can state whatever they like about psychology, because they have a mind! I have a car, but that doesn't mean I know anything about automechanics!
Mach's statement that either Amanda's statements were made fully intentionally (and with a particular purpose in mind), OR she was unaware of even making them is a false dichotomy- one which even a cursory look at empirical evidence would disconfirm, is a case in point.

 

[Dan O.]

For the record, "short" was derived from the elevation of the camera. Here is a self portrait showing how the official photographer holds the Nikon when taking crime scene photos:

Though we don't see the camera at the instant the photo was taken, the published photo was taken from a significantly lower elevation as evidenced by the alignment of foreground objects on background objects. A difference not accounted for by a few inches difference in height so it is reasonable to presume that the published photo was shot without framing the photo through the viewfinder.


Comparing the face in this photo with the recent images of Profazio,

I note that the {short} fat perp has a flat brow like Mignini while Profazio has a visible ridge between his eyes. This could be muscular as opposed to skeletal so could change with expression. More reference photos for Profazio may be necessary to rule him out.

 

[Grinder]

I see evidence of a sexual violence; and I see evidence of multiple perpetrators; I also see evidence of Amanda Knox's involvement, and of Sollecito's.
I also see evidence that the crime was committed by someone under drug effect and that all three were on drugs that night.
I also see evidence that all three had contacts with drug dealers and had - each one in a different way - some issue regarding their sexual conduct. And also they had some relation with violence or violent fantasies and knifes.

Not exactly an answer to my question.

What evidence is there that the murder(s) were on drugs?

What percentage of the college students "had contacts with drug dealers"? What do you mean by contacts?

What percentage of people in their twenties have "some issue with their sexual conduct"?

My SO watches Walking Dead does she have some relation to zombies?

Catnip reads Manga and posts graphic violence. Does he have relation to violence?

What actual violence did any of the three participate in precious to Nov. 1, 2007?

Do you believe that and do you see any evidence that the murder was associated with any sort of sex game, satanic rite or a ritual of any sort?

What about the murder distinguishes it from a simple assault and murder?

 

[Grinder]

Really someone thinks this is not Mignini? How many fat huge headed morons who remarkably resemble Zero Mostel are there in Italy? (Zero wears a convincing toupee otherwise he would be Migninis brother). Mignini a man who seems to dress in spite of Italy's norm ...a style befitting a camping holiday...after two weeks in the cold wet rain.

I resubmit for your evaluation Mignini...or is it Zero? Hint Zero is dead but he would have made a great Mignini in the movie about fraud in the IJS.

Randy it would seem by ILE standards that the photograph of the photographer is compatible with Mignini; therefore it is Mignini.

The answer to how many men in Perugia are compatible with the photograph; exactly the same number that are compatible with the bloody print on the bathmat.

 

[Grinder]

Is this your answer to my long-standing question about how (according to the ISC) Hellman allegedly erred in law in acquitting the defendants of the main charges?

No this was an answer to my question of how the calunnia conviction could stand if Hellmann had been totally discredited.

I think the short answer is that Hellmann wasn't totally discredited only his motivations on the main charges.

Since he wasn't totally discredited, does that mean that his assessments of Curatolo and acceptance of C&V can be used by the current appeals court. I would say yes.

 

[Bill Williams]

No this was an answer to my question of how the calunnia conviction could stand if Hellmann had been totally discredited.

I think the short answer is that Hellmann wasn't totally discredited only his motivations on the main charges.

Since he wasn't totally discredited, does that mean that his assessments of Curatolo and acceptance of C&V can be used by the current appeals court. I would say yes.

I agree.