• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Diocletus said:
I go back to the supreme court decision, and I just feel that it puts such restrictions and requirements on the interpretation of the evidence that Nencini is really going to have to convict. The motivations documents is going to be one screwed up mess, though.

If I'm Nencini, I'm doing a lot of this: "Well, we have x and y. The supreme courts says it is z. So, z it is."
Click to expand...

But the Corte Suprema di Cassazione is a little like a senior citizen with memory issues. They will forget what they said in the last motivation. They forgot that the sex game theory had been dropped this time.
 
platonov said:
I did ask halides1 a while back if he was in favour of stiffer sentences for crimes of this kind in Italy and he (and others) were very gung ho - but apparently only for black convicts.


I could find the link in about 10 secs but I dont want LJ to think I have superpowers
Click to expand...

Chris_Halkides said:
That is a gross distortion of the conversation, not that I am surprised. I am in favor of a heavier sentence for rape and murder than sixteen years for anyone who is actually guilty, regardless of color or economic status. On the other hand, I favor releasing people wrongfully convicted, regardless of color or economic status.

I have publicly supported black victims of wrongful convictions such as in Tulia, Texas. I also believe that the evidence against Eric Frimpong is well short of that needed for a conviction BARD, and I have attempted to help his defense by pointing out the possibility of secondary DNA transfer as the second of two plausible scenarios for how the victim's DNA was found Mr. Frimpong's genitals (the first was that she allegedly groped him). The evidence in that case as a whole points to another individual, her (possibly former) boyfriend, as having had sexual contact with the (probably semiconscious) victim, given that his semen was found on her underwear. The original judge "...the Hon. Brian Hill, who is on public record saying that in his entire career he had never seen a single case where the evidence of guilt was so 'compelling', a statement which, based on the fact that the evidence was essentially non-existent, would seem to indicate a certain level of bias against the accused..." This statement proves that Massei is not the only judge in the world who is too thick to be presiding over serious criminal trials.
Click to expand...

You have been through this before. I doubt even this poster believes what he is accusing members here of. I suspect his goal has nothing to do with discussing the actual evidence in the case.
 
acbytesla said:
I am optimistic. I can't believe every one in Italy are idiots.
Click to expand...

I tend towards an acquittal as well. If the decision is based on the evidence and what's happened in court this time round, there should be an acquittal; the big unknown is how influential the SC report will be, and I have no idea of the answer to that. I certainly don't think there's been anything in the trial itself which indicates there's going to be a conviction (or, for that matter, an acquittal). I agree with HB that the previous two trials were fairly predictable, but I don't think this one is - even if, as Anthony said earlier, it will be very easy to spot supposed clues in hindsight, whichever way the decision goes!
 
Mary_H said:
I would not be surprised should a fatal accident befall Rudy once he gets out.
Click to expand...

Mary methinks that PQ will be sending you a message about the FBI and KGB showing up unannounced. Mach will tell you that is mafia talk. Boy oh boy.
 
anglolawyer said:
I am a bit of a critic of Hellman and often wonder whether he would be so well regarded among the PIPs if the background facts were altered slightly so as, for example, to have her acquitted by Massei for calunnia but convicted by H-Z. Anyway, it is useful to remember what he said when severing the link between the murder and calunnia (a link urged upon him as a logical necessity by the prosecution and parroted here from time to time by Machiaevlli):
Click to expand...

I think the main problem with Hellmann's motivations is he didn't spend 1000 pages discrediting every permutation of the 'evidence' so it couldn't be resurrected in the prosecution appeal.

I wonder where the highlighted words in square brackets came from? Why the brackets? They make a huge difference. They bring constructive knowledge into the picture. As Donald Rumsfeld might have said, there are things we know (actual knowledge) and things we ought to but may not actually know (constructive knowledge). If the bracketed words fairly translate from Hellman (and I trust kompo) then Hellman clearly thought constructive knowledge enough. As you put it - she should have known better.
Click to expand...

Excellent point, Komponisto's translation makes sense, I only wonder if sometimes the Italian legal system doesn't.

ETA - if H-Z's decision on calunnia was a sop to the prosecution it teaches the lesson that no quarter should be given to some people. The fight sometimes has to be to the death.
Click to expand...

I agree, there is a time for peace through compromise, but there's also times you have to crush the serpent with your heel! :p
 
Mary_H said:
I would not be surprised should a fatal accident befall Rudy once he gets out.
Click to expand...

Grinder said:
Mary methinks that PQ will be sending you a message about the FBI and KGB showing up unannounced. Mach will tell you that is mafia talk. Boy oh boy.
Click to expand...

I think Mary_H (Welcome to the forum and thank you, btw) is implying that the prosecution does not want him running his mouth.
 
katy_did said:
I tend towards an acquittal as well. If the decision is based on the evidence and what's happened in court this time round, there should be an acquittal; the big unknown is how influential the SC report will be, and I have no idea of the answer to that. I certainly don't think there's been anything in the trial itself which indicates there's going to be a conviction (or, for that matter, an acquittal). I agree with HB that the previous two trials were fairly predictable, but I don't think this one is - even if, as Anthony said earlier, it will be very easy to spot supposed clues in hindsight, whichever way the decision goes!
Click to expand...

I hope you are right, I have given up on making predictions based on the evidence. All of the trials would have found them not guilty if that were the case.
 
Last edited:
CoulsdonUK said:
I think the emotive use of the words “lynch mod” is pure hyperbole, I doubt anyone here has ever witnessed one.

The use of Hairy Rag is just a play on words and is certainly not directed at you.

30 years in jail? In Italy that is probably 7 years actual time, it seems.
Click to expand...

hyperbole, poetic license. You say potato.

Of course I've never witnessed an actual lynching...thank god. But is this really any better? A kangaroo court followed by a thirty year sentence??
 
katy_did said:
I tend towards an acquittal as well. If the decision is based on the evidence and what's happened in court this time round, there should be an acquittal; the big unknown is how influential the SC report will be, and I have no idea of the answer to that. I certainly don't think there's been anything in the trial itself which indicates there's going to be a conviction (or, for that matter, an acquittal). I agree with HB that the previous two trials were fairly predictable, but I don't think this one is - even if, as Anthony said earlier, it will be very easy to spot supposed clues in hindsight, whichever way the decision goes!
Click to expand...


I was about to write a post on this issue that was very similar to yours, but you beat me to it!

Like you, I think that the reported proceedings of the Nencini court make me think that acquittals are the most likely verdicts. But, as many of us have stated before, the stance of the SC now introduces another variable into the mix, and one which is very difficult to weigh objectively.

Aside from the reported court happenings over the past few months, we also need to remember that the Nencini court is considering the entire case file - including the horribly illogical and self-contradictory Massei verdict/reasoning, the C/V report, and the discrediting of Curatolo and Quintavalle. Add in the other game-changers from this latest trial - the Carabinieri forensic report, the apparent volte-face on ToD from the prosecution, the strengthening of evidence related to actual ToD - and I believe that acquittals are the only reasonable option for Nencini's court.
 
katy_did said:
I tend towards an acquittal as well. If the decision is based on the evidence and what's happened in court this time round, there should be an acquittal; the big unknown is how influential the SC report will be, and I have no idea of the answer to that. I certainly don't think there's been anything in the trial itself which indicates there's going to be a conviction (or, for that matter, an acquittal). I agree with HB that the previous two trials were fairly predictable, but I don't think this one is - even if, as Anthony said earlier, it will be very easy to spot supposed clues in hindsight, whichever way the decision goes!
Click to expand...

The simple fact is that the case just gets weaker and weaker as time goes by. The knife evidence got weaker, the DNA evidence got weaker, the motive got weaker, the time frame got weaker.

What is actually more incriminating this time around? I don't see it. Not that I saw the ISC's decision either.
 
Diocletus said:
Could somebody post a cropped screengrab of Fat Man's face? And let's get the guy's name.
Click to expand...


There are some good images in the time index from about 00:12:30 to 00:16:00. At one point the younger looking camera boy has his glasses off and is staring directly into the camera. He's wearing a blue shirt and red tie under the bunny suit, possibly a black jacket.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
I was under the impression that the defense stayed in the van and watched, presumably by closed-circuit television, although a list of people who were there would certainly be helpful. It is not clear to me why the defense would have released that particular photo, given its documented ability to suggest to people that Amanda was a liar.
Click to expand...

I didn't think the consultants stayed in the van but I am not certain of that.

The defense would not have to release the photo/s to the media. If the photos taken became part of the case file deposited in court by either side, is it possible that they were available to journalists who made inquiry to have copies of them? I don't know if that is what happened just putting it out there.
 
Diocletus said:
I go back to the supreme court decision, and I just feel that it puts such restrictions and requirements on the interpretation of the evidence that Nencini is really going to have to convict. The motivations documents is going to be one screwed up mess, though.

If I'm Nencini, I'm doing a lot of this: "Well, we have x and y. The supreme courts says it is z. So, z it is."
Click to expand...

yes , thats how one protects and furthers a career...and in Italy stay out of prison.
 
acbytesla said:
hyperbole, poetic license. You say potato.

Of course I've never witnessed an actual lynching...thank god. But is this really any better? A kangaroo court followed by a thirty year sentence??
Click to expand...

It is a whole lot better, really! Let's leave it there.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom