• 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.
MDDVS said:
It's not surprising though, considering Italy's record of human rights violations.
Click to expand...

Compared to whom?

Go to Amnesty International's "The State of Human Rights" report and compare Italy to the USA.

Or take a look at the Human Rights Watch "World Report 2014" and compare.
 
Vibio said:
Compared to whom?

Go to Amnesty International's "The State of Human Rights" report and compare Italy to the USA.

Or take a look at the Human Rights Watch "World Report 2014" and compare.
Click to expand...

Compared with other western european countries, of course. Not impressive at all. Why is the comparison with the USA so relevant?
 
pilot padron said:
Rejoice that a drug addled spoiled brat goes unpunished for horrendously murdering Meredith Kercher?
Click to expand...

Pilot, I don't engage this in discussion much, but one thing about the case really puzzles me and I'm hoping you can clear up. If Knox and Sollecito "horrendously murdered Meredith Kercher" why was none of their DNA found in Kercher's room, yet a lot of Guede's was?
 
MDDVS said:
Compared with other western european countries, of course. Not impressive at all. Why is the comparison with the USA so relevant?
Click to expand...


Oh... OK. I foolishly thought that comparisons were being made to the US.

If the US were a European country, it could not even qualify to be member of the European Union with the draconian criminal justice system that it has.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
Would a guilty Raffaele stay in Italy for the verdict? No.
Click to expand...

The Hate Mongers always talk out of both sides their mouth.

If you arent in Italy its because Amandas guilty, and Raffaeles not innocent though he stayed in Italy.

Rudy Guede is just a liability, the hate mongers dont like him, but they do like him for obvious reasons.
Rudy is the only one who could embarrass the political motivated system, which as I see this inbred system, who convicts on poop theories and gut instinct, could easily end up like Toto. remember Toto, the Hate Mongers defended him too, how alert and healthy he was, sharp and brilliant. Then he embarrased the "the pack" in Hellmans court and was whisked away to polizia custody and amazingly dead soon there after.

But like a Hate Monger joyfully said "its not the prosecution who is on trial".
 
anglolawyer said:
I don't think the process is judicial. In a case where there has been a conviction overseas, the treaty provides for a political response to an extradition request.

<.... sinister deletia ....>​

So the way I read it, the treaty leaves much in the realm of politics and, in this case, not so much in the judicial sphere, although I don't doubt there will be case law on the interpretation of the application of the treaty to already-convicted persons since I imagine the decisions of executive organs of the US are themselves subject to judicial oversight. So you could have an executive decision to extradite judicially overridden and referred back. We (or many of us) may well be dead before it's all over.
Click to expand...

The judicial part is so that the courts in the US can satisfy themselves that the terms of the treaty are being adhered to. Part of this is that US courts will also have to satisfy itself that, in the case of the request of an American citizen, that the receiving coutry is not violating rights which would benefit the accused *as if* the matter had been tried in the US. Potentially, it is at this point where doubly jeopardy - as interpreted in the US - would come into play.

There is also the matter of - did the accused actually receive a fair trial overseas - again, not by the standards of the overseas court, but by standards of right *as if* the thing had happened in the US. This is also where beyond a reasonable doubt would come into play. In the US, liberty cannot be deprived from someone without due process.

In my opinion, when a US court sees the way this has been prosecuted, with shifting theories, and with probablies being cited as "proof".... well, you get the drift.

The political part, in my mind, is where this would never lead to an actual extradition. In Canada, for instance, no extradition happens to US States with the death penalty, unless there's a guarantee that it comes off the table. Otherwise extradition does not happen.

The point being is that there's a political evaluation - is it in the best interests of the deporting-country, and does it reflect the values and political will of that country to proceed?

With the coverage this is now getting in the USA, even with a second conviction, my read is that the political stuff is in Knox's favour. For me, this is the same as saying, people actually DO know the fix was in for her and Raffaele.
 
JREF2010 said:
The Hate Mongers always talk out of both sides their mouth.

If you arent in Italy its because Amandas guilty, and Raffaeles not innocent though he stayed in Italy.

Rudy Guede is just a liability, the hate mongers dont like him, but they do like him for obvious reasons.
Rudy is the only one who could embarrass the political motivated system, which as I see this inbred system, who convicts on poop theories and gut instinct, could easily end up like Toto. remember Toto, the Hate Mongers defended him too, how alert and healthy he was, sharp and brilliant. Then he embarrased the "the pack" in Hellmans court and was whisked away to polizia custody and amazingly dead soon there after.

But like a Hate Monger joyfully said "its not the prosecution who is on trial".
Click to expand...

This is the simplest of all things.....

Guilty people flee BEFORE anyone knows they're involved.

Innocent people flee only when wrongfully convicted.

In any event, the "Raffaele fleeing" story is not what it seems. He made no attempt to flee the country. The police needed to find him to endorse his passport according to law as well as EU documents. Raffaele cooperated with that process and did not try to hamper or evade police.

Yet another non-story. This has been the hallmark of the wrongful conviction - factoids somehow become facts.
 
Last edited:
pilot padron said:
Maybe I am missing something:confused:

After *full* legal process, just verdict and a reasonable sentence was rendered

Are you now suggesting that all law abiding citizens throughout the world should now rejoice with you about extradition technicalities ??
Rejoice that a twice convicted murderess will possibly escape the reasonable jail term that she was rightfully sentenced to ??
Rejoice that a drug addled spoiled brat goes unpunished for horrendously murdering Meredith Kercher?

Really ??:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not full as others have pointed out. Also innocent as others have pointed out. If it does become full and America tells Italy to shove the extradition request where the sun don't shine I will have a party. Yay!!!
 
Bill Williams said:
The judicial part is so that the courts in the US can satisfy themselves that the terms of the treaty are being adhered to. Part of this is that US courts will also have to satisfy itself that, in the case of the request of an American citizen, that the receiving coutry is not violating rights which would benefit the accused *as if* the matter had been tried in the US. Potentially, it is at this point where doubly jeopardy - as interpreted in the US - would come into play.

There is also the matter of - did the accused actually receive a fair trial overseas - again, not by the standards of the overseas court, but by standards of right *as if* the thing had happened in the US. This is also where beyond a reasonable doubt would come into play. In the US, liberty cannot be deprived from someone without due process.

In my opinion, when a US court sees the way this has been prosecuted, with shifting theories, and with probablies being cited as "proof".... well, you get the drift.

The political part, in my mind, is where this would never lead to an actual extradition. In Canada, for instance, no extradition happens to US States with the death penalty, unless there's a guarantee that it comes off the table. Otherwise extradition does not happen.

The point being is that there's a political evaluation - is it in the best interests of the deporting-country, and does it reflect the values and political will of that country to proceed?

With the coverage this is now getting in the USA, even with a second conviction, my read is that the political stuff is in Knox's favour. For me, this is the same as saying, people actually DO know the fix was in for her and Raffaele.
Click to expand...
And what of Raffaele?
 
CoulsdonUK said:
I beg to differ. I think Meredith was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Click to expand...

To be absolutely accurate, it is Rudy Guede who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He had no right to be in the cottage on the evening of Nov 1 2007. In fact, having been captured in a burglary and in possession of stolen property and burglary tools a week earlier, he should have been under arrest. He was released by the police in Milan after input from the police in Perugia.

Meredith, Amanda, Filomena, and Laura had every right to be where they were on Nov 1 & 2, 2007.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
The judicial part is so that the courts in the US can satisfy themselves that the terms of the treaty are being adhered to. Part of this is that US courts will also have to satisfy itself that, in the case of the request of an American citizen, that the receiving coutry is not violating rights which would benefit the accused *as if* the matter had been tried in the US. Potentially, it is at this point where doubly jeopardy - as interpreted in the US - would come into play.

There is also the matter of - did the accused actually receive a fair trial overseas - again, not by the standards of the overseas court, but by standards of right *as if* the thing had happened in the US. This is also where beyond a reasonable doubt would come into play. In the US, liberty cannot be deprived from someone without due process.

In my opinion, when a US court sees the way this has been prosecuted, with shifting theories, and with probablies being cited as "proof".... well, you get the drift.

The political part, in my mind, is where this would never lead to an actual extradition. In Canada, for instance, no extradition happens to US States with the death penalty, unless there's a guarantee that it comes off the table. Otherwise extradition does not happen.

The point being is that there's a political evaluation - is it in the best interests of the deporting-country, and does it reflect the values and political will of that country to proceed?

With the coverage this is now getting in the USA, even with a second conviction, my read is that the political stuff is in Knox's favour. For me, this is the same as saying, people actually DO know the fix was in for her and Raffaele.
Click to expand...

Bill, did you read my post? The part about the decision to extradite being an executive decision? While that may well be subject to judicial oversight, the grounds available are likely to be very narrowly confined. In order for the judiciary not to be in a position to subvert the executive, or usurp its authority, my guess would be (American jurists please comment) that only if the exercise of the discretion to extradite is unreasonable in a high degree, or affected by fundamental procedural irregularity, or something of that kind, would a court interfere.

In entering into the treaty the US has conferred a priori validity on convictions secured in Italy. The plain words of the treaty require nothing more than the filing of certain documents. On what grounds have such executive decisions been challenged before? Have you any relevant case law you can cite?

If the intention of the treaty was that a probable cause test should apply to requests both of convicted as well as merely suspected persons there would have been no reason not to give discretion to the judiciary, but in case of convicted persons the judiciary has no role and there is no probable cause requirement. It may be case law has placed a gloss on this interpretation but, if so, I don't see it cited in your post.
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
I understand you not liking what he said, but what's wrong with this opinion?
.....
Click to expand...

I didn't see this interview, but in others he has insisted that Amanda is guilty and seems to accept the prosecution's allegations without reservation. Anything he says about extradition starts with his premise that there's no doubt about her guilt.
 
RoseMontague said:
Not full as others have pointed out. Also innocent as others have pointed out. If it does become full and America tells Italy to shove the extradition request where the sun don't shine I will have a party. Yay!!!
Click to expand...
No the judicial process is not over; the defence are going to appeal the verdict. However, can you see the defence appeal being based on the argument that the Italian Supreme Court acted illegally and somehow the Italian Supreme Court overturning this conviction on that basis?

Of course any appeal will depend on the reasoning’s used in the yet to be written motivations report.

For what it is worth, I doubt America will extradite Amanda and if so that would be a hollow victory as Raffaele will more than likely be imprisoned.
 
CoulsdonUK said:
And what of Raffaele?
Click to expand...

I can answer this as I have lived in many countries in Africa and Asia and have observed broken police and legal systems. Raffaele has been falsely convicted for a crime he did not commit in a legal system that disregards basic legal rights. The Italians just put up a better facade than I saw in places like Congo and China. Raffaele will suffer like millions of others in societies with corrupt legal systems.

  • Withholding or destruction of exculpatory evidence (computers, video from store, pillowcase).
  • Mishandling/damage of evidence (bra clasp).
  • False analysis of evidence (footprint, shoeprint, knife, bra clasp, knife stain on bed sheet! Parking lot video times, cell phone connection times and locations).
  • Physical threats and striking in police interrogation.
  • Denial of access to an attorney.
  • Detention in solitary for 6 months before being formally charged with a crime.
  • False testimony by police (stefanoni, Biondo) in court.
  • Police and prosecutor attempt to falsify court record.
  • Right to an honest translator in police interrogation.
  • and more.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom