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

Status
Not open for further replies.
This question is best for Machiavelli, but it is one that has been much on my mind.
2 judges and 6 lay jurors equals 8
my understanding is 4 all means acquittal.

1. Can 4 lay jurors guarantee acquittal?
2. How does a motivations report look if Nencini votes to convict, but is in the <=4 camp?

Nencini in no way looks inclined to be overruled on anything, yet votes is votes.

I am really interested in these questions, especially #2. What if lay judges tell the professional judges to pound sand. The Italian system seems so foreign. This hardly seems like any trial that you might see in the US. They really have had only witness and a short discussion about the DNA and then everything is up to the transcripts. I realize the professional jurors oversee case after case after case. But what about the lay jurors? Are they ruling on just this one case or dozens themselves?? I mean, how were they selected? And is it for this one case only, or is it a term, of say months?
 
As a woman, I can assure you we do hate dirty old men, they are disgusting. As someone who has spent time in Italy, I can also assure you women are considered lesser than men. I saw incident after incident of egregious behavior toward women on the part of men. It is part of their culture.

Ampulla, RandyN wrote about "women hating dirty old men". I believe he omitted punctuation that would have made his meaning clearer. From reading his earlier comments, I believe RandyN was referring to "women-hating dirty-old-men", and that he was referring to socially-conservative older men such as Mignini who are hostile to women who do not live their lives the way these men would prefer them to behave.

(Mignini projects his fantasy sex orgy on Amanda, although there is zero evidence of Amanda ever being involved is such behavior or violence.)

And yes, I understand why women hate dirty old men.
 
Last edited:
I am really interested in these questions, especially #2. What if lay judges tell the professional judges to pound sand. The Italian system seems so foreign. This hardly seems like any trial that you might see in the US. They really have had only witness and a short discussion about the DNA and then everything is up to the transcripts. I realize the professional jurors oversee case after case after case. But what about the lay jurors? Are they ruling on just this one case or dozens themselves?? I mean, how were they selected? And is it for this one case only, or is it a term, of say months?

My understanding is that the lay judges in the Italian court system operate on a volunteer basis sort of like a jury but they are not accorded the same respect or independence of the traditional juror. They are instructed in the facts and points of law by the professional judges and typically go along with whatever they say, sort of like a rubber stamp.

As for the 11-year-old sex case, yes the response in the comment sections of the articles in Italy is pretty much outrage.
 
From Wiki:

Professional Judges[edit]
The Corte d'Assise is composed of two judges and six lay citizens. The presiding judge must be a member of a Court of Appeals. The other judge is known as judge a latere (EN sitting by). In the Corte d'Assise d'Appello (EN Appellate Courts of Assizes), the presiding judge must be a member of the Supreme Court of Cassation, and the judge a latere must be a member of a Court of Appeals.
Lay Judges[edit]
Lay judges for both the Corte d'Assise and the Corte d'Assise d'Appello have to be older than thirty and younger than sixty-five. Lay judges for the Corte d'Assise must have completed their education to the level of junior high school (scuola media). The lay judges for the Corte d'Assise d'Appello must hold a diploma from a senior high school (scuola superiore).
Exclusions[edit]
The following people cannot be appointed to the office of lay judge:
judges or other members of the judiciary system;
members of the armed forces or police;
ministers of any religion and clergymen.
Office of lay judge and appointment thereto[edit]
In every municipality (comune), a board composed by the Mayor and two members of the Municipal Council (Consiglio Comunale) form two registers containing all the citizens meeting the aforementioned criteria. If they do not see to that, the President of the local Courthouse (Tribunale) acts in their stead. The registers are then transmitted to the President of the Courthouse. A board is then convened, formed by the President and all the mayors of the municipalities of the district, to form a register of all the eligible citizens living in that district. The register is then published and all citizen may raise objections within 15 days from publication. The registers are revised every two years. When a crime needs to be tried, the President of the Courthouse draws the names of the lay judges and of their substitutes in a public audience. After being appointed, the lay Judges take the following oath:
Con la ferma volontà di compiere da persona d'onore tutto il mio dovere, cosciente della suprema importanza morale e civile dell'ufficio che la legge mi affida, giuro di ascoltare con diligenza e di esaminare con serenità prove e ragioni dell'accusa e della difesa, di formare il mio intimo convincimento giudicando con rettitudine ed imparzialità, e di tenere lontano dall'animo mio ogni sentimento di avversione e di favore, affinché la sentenza riesca quale la società deve attenderla: affermazione di verità e di giustizia. Giuro altresì di conservare il segreto.
by which they swear they will diligently listen to the reasons of both the prosecution and the defense, will serenely examine the evidence, and will honestly and impartially judge.
The lay judges are paid for every day of actual exercise of their duty. In these instances, they are considered public officials. They continue in office for three months, or until the trial in which they are serving ends. Lay judges wear a sash in the national colours and are not technically jurors, as the term is understood in Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence. The Italian word Giudice (Judge) refers both to the eight together as a collective body and to each of them considered separately as a member of that body.
Since lay judges are not jurors, they cannot be excused, unless there are grounds that would also justify an objection to a judge. So, the office is practically mandatory. Also, they are not sequestered, because a trial often lasts too long to restrict travel. An Italian trial, including the preliminary investigations, preliminary hearing, trial and appeals, can last several years. Keeping a citizen - who continues to work, while serving as a lay judge - sequestered for years would be unfeasible.
 
.
I doubt that appeals trial judges, or appeals trial lay judges, are inclined to casually disregard the judgement made by their own peers in a previous appeal trial. In fact they probably do not appreciate the Supreme Court overruling appeals court decisions, especially when the Supreme Court exceeds its own authority to do it. I suspect the judges and lay judges of this appeals court have made their decision already. I also suspect that before this trial even started, they concluded that barring significant new revelations, which of course did not happen, the previous appeals trial was fundamentally correct when it determined that Raffaele and Amanda had nothing to do with Meredith's murder.

I think they will agree with the first appeals court findings that:
- Rudy was a known burglar.
- Rudy found the cottage empty.
- Rudy did what burlgars do and opportunistically broke in.
- Meredith arrived home while Rudy was still in the cottage.
- A confrontation occurred, and Rudy killed her.

My opinion.
.
 
Wait, did you guys see this:

http://www.dougbremner.com/?_escaped_fragment_=?p=1

The brother of Meredith Kercher, John Kercher Jr., has been writing under the pseudonym of harryrag, where he has conducted an ongoing campaign over the last six years dedicated to the conviction of Amanda Knox for a murder which she did not commit
.

Sorry if this was already posted, but can it be true?

Also, I really hope the predictions of not guilty verdict will be coming true, but I'm scared.
 
Oh wow that is one horrible page. I literally can't read it. Can't someone get him to change the formatting to suit normal human eyes?

I have heard something like this rumoured from time to time. I presume he must be really sure if he has said so in public like this. What a horrible situation.

Rolfe.
 
Oh, yes, that is horrible to read, but I didn't even notice everything else due to the shock. I mean, that would be huge and sad, very sad.
 
How much influence has the Harry Rag character had in the whole internet guilter campaign? Is it possible that he has been central to the entire phenomenon? We have commented several times on how weird it is, but of course if these freaks had someone who was personally involved in the case to crystallise round it could explain an awful lot.

Rolfe.
 
Belz,

I would say that the majority of the people who post here are pro-innocence. However, there are some pro-guilt posters. I agree with Rolfe's comments.

I'm a bit put off by Rolfe's "blindingly obvious" comment if only because it's rarely so cut and dried. I remember when this thread started, it seemed that most people leaned towards guilt. Of course, back then I was a wee lad, and hamburgers cost 16 cents.

Could someone give a short summary of the reason why this "consensus" has changed, for those of us not interested in reading eight monstrous threads ?
 
The evidence of Meredith's digestive tract shows beyond any reasonable doubt that she died not long after 9 pm. Knox and Sollecito have an alibi for that time.

The entire history of the case indicates that Meredith was surprised by a burglar, Rudy Guede, who was already in the house when she returned unexpectedly. Somehow, a confrontation escalated to sexual assault and murder. Not necessarily in that order. There is not a single piece of solid evidence that suggests anything else.

The real interest is in why the law enforcement authorities jumped to the conclusion that Knox was the murderer, or was involved in the murder, before the forensics results were in. Then, why they continued to insist that she and Sollecito were involved when these results showed a pretty straightforward story of burglary and opportunistic murder on the part of Guede.

The answer is as simple as a desire not to lose face, and people digging themselves deeper and deeper rather than acknowledge that they made a mistake right at the beginning.

Rolfe.
 
I'm a bit put off by Rolfe's "blindingly obvious" comment if only because it's rarely so cut and dried. I remember when this thread started, it seemed that most people leaned towards guilt. Of course, back then I was a wee lad, and hamburgers cost 16 cents.

Could someone give a short summary of the reason why this "consensus" has changed, for those of us not interested in reading eight monstrous threads ?

short version, the evidence that was used in the first trial turned out to be pure baloney.

DNA on Knife - Poor Science not up to international standards, or even Italian Standards.
DNA on Bra - contaminated with multiple donors
Witnesses - One was a heron addict who couldn't get the day right, another had no ability to determine the time and might even have the day wrong, another claimed to have seen nothing for months, until "remembering" seeing something that made zero sense.
Break in room was contaminated and poorly investigated.
Claims of a clean up fell apart
Prosecution's Time of Death was wildly out

and so on

In the end the prosecution has been left with -

There was a argument about poop.
Knox had poor hygenie and Kercher disliked her for it
Knox is a witch.
 
Last edited:
Oh wow that is one horrible page. I literally can't read it. Can't someone get him to change the formatting to suit normal human eyes?

I have heard something like this rumoured from time to time. I presume he must be really sure if he has said so in public like this. What a horrible situation.

Rolfe.

Oh, dear. How very, very sad. To me, this angry, misled man is one more tragedy that the Perugian Postal Police, Ms. Stefanoni and Mr. Mignini ought to be called upon to answer for. Even if he doesn't turn out to be Harry Rag, he seems to have been meddling in the lives of the Bremners, believing with all his heart that Amanda was involved in killing his sister.

And yes, DB does need a different design theme for his blog. Among other faults, it doesn't scroll right on an iPad.
 
unlikely assumptions

Could someone give a short summary of the reason why this "consensus" has changed, for those of us not interested in reading eight monstrous threads ?
Not just the lack of contents of the duodenum, but several lines of evidence suggest that the attack happened shortly after Meredith returned home, or at least before 10 PM. Her cell phone made a call to a UK bank without the UK prefix code, for example. She did not put damp laundry out to dry. She did not call her sick mother, send any email, or remove her jacket. Her cell phone connected to a much more distant tower than the one it usually did. Even the Florentine prosecutor Crini acknowledged that AK and RS were at his flat until about 9:30. There is not enough time for them to meet up with Rudy by chance, go to the flat, and have an argument that escalates in murder, unless one makes some very unlikely assumptions. MOO.
 
Ampulla, RandyN wrote about "women hating dirty old men". I believe he omitted punctuation that would have made his meaning clearer. From reading his earlier comments, I believe RandyN was referring to "women-hating dirty-old-men", and that he was referring to socially-conservative older men such as Mignini who are hostile to women who do not live their lives the way these men would prefer them to behave.

(Mignini projects his fantasy sex orgy on Amanda, although there is zero evidence of Amanda ever being involved is such behavior or violence.)

And yes, I understand why women hate dirty old men.

Yes, I actually realize that. I was just being funny (or trying to be.)
 
Her cell phone made a call to a UK bank without the UK prefix code, for example.


And that bank was the Abbey. The first listing in the alphabetical listing of her stored phone numbers. Exactly the number most likely to be called accidentally by someone unfamiliar with the phone, pushing buttons trying to stop it bleeping or turn it off.

Rolfe.
 
Not just the lack of contents of the duodenum, but several lines of evidence suggest that the attack happened shortly after Meredith returned home, or at least before 10 PM. Her cell phone made a call to a UK bank without the UK prefix code, for example. She did not put damp laundry out to dry. She did not call her sick mother, send any email, or remove her jacket. Her cell phone connected to a much more distant tower than the one it usually did. Even the Florentine prosecutor Crini acknowledged that AK and RS were at his flat until about 9:30. There is not enough time for them to meet up with Rudy by chance, go to the flat, and have an argument that escalates in murder, unless one makes some very unlikely assumptions. MOO.
And Rudy places the attack before 9:30. It's funny that ISC insists upon 'osmosis' but completely ignores all these precise, interlocking elements in assessing time of death.
 
Oh, yes, that is horrible to read, but I didn't even notice everything else due to the shock. I mean, that would be huge and sad, very sad.


Does anyone know if Doug Bremner has sufficiently reliable evidence to state that harryrag/Machine is John Kercher jr?

If he does not have such evidence, then this would be an egregiously bad mistake of "outing", given that it concerns the brother of the murder victim.

If, however, he does have such evidence, then I add my voice to those who say it's shocking and sad. Furthermore, if there is solid supporting evidence for this assertion, I think it's appropriate to reveal the link: if people intimately related to the case are blogging/posting/agitating under anonymous pseudonyms, then they ought to be offered no protection against outing (again, with the proviso that the evidence is sufficiently strong and reliable).

Does anyone have sufficient contact with Doub Bremner to ask him if he has sufficient evidence to make this claim with confidence - and if he does, will he consider sharing that evidence?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom