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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vibio said:
"If a suspect's freedom of movement is hindered, the interrogation must be videotaped."

Oh please. What police station in Italy was equipped with videotape apparatus in 2007.

Again: it's even rare in parts of the the US today. And this in NY... not Alabama:

http://jjie.org/false-confessions-n-y-state-mulls-bill-requiring-videotaped-interrogations/
Click to expand...

Take it up with Maffei and Costa.

Do you think Italy's criminal justice system is inferior to that of the United States? Yesterday you seemed to feel differently.
 
Vibio said:
"If a suspect's freedom of movement is hindered, the interrogation must be videotaped."

Oh please. What police station in Italy was equipped with videotape apparatus in 2007.

Again: it's even rare in parts of the the US today. And this in NY... not Alabama:

http://jjie.org/false-confessions-n-y-state-mulls-bill-requiring-videotaped-interrogations/
Click to expand...

Of course they have such a system. They bought it from that same outfit that charged Comodi 180,000 for the cartoon.
 
Vibio said:
Yeah right, especially after the US State Department monitored the trials and found no irregularities.
Click to expand...

Mary_H said:
Cite.
Click to expand...

This is what you are looking for.

It refers to one trial, singular, not trials, plural. It is from 2009 and as far as I know there has been no statement from the State Department since then. Ian Kelly did say he had had no indication that Amanda was treated unfairly under local law. However, he equivocates quite a bit and emphasizes that the State Department will continue to monitor the situation.
 
Vibio said:
"If a suspect's freedom of movement is hindered, the interrogation must be videotaped."

Oh please. What police station in Italy was equipped with videotape apparatus in 2007.

Again: it's even rare in parts of the the US today. And this in NY... not Alabama:

http://jjie.org/false-confessions-n-y-state-mulls-bill-requiring-videotaped-interrogations/
Click to expand...

Mignini said they didn't record the interrogation because of budget reasons not because they didn't have it. Are you saying they only had audio and if so where is that?
 
anglolawyer said:
Well I don't know when it became not a problem. It certainly seems to have been a problem when all those judges were locking people up just on the basis there was a request, what with that comity of nations thing an' all.
Well, if we're talking about comity, here's what Italy would do:

The European Convention on Extradition (1957) does not contain a general provision that excludes extradition if there is a risk of infringement on the human rights of the requested person.[4]

Consequently, the requested state can be confronted with two conflicting obligations: the one to extradite, deriving from the extradition treaty, and the one to abstain from extradition, resulting from the human rights convention.

Which of those two obligations then has to prevail is of course not for the European Human Rights Court to determine; the only task of that court is to interpret the Convention and to determine whether a Contracting State has or has not violated its provisions.[5]

The requested state has to weigh the two conflicting obligations and give precedence to the one that in the particular circumstances of the case is the most important.[6]
Click to expand...

What would be the comity-ous thing for the US to do? I mean, European nations are constantly refusing/resisting to extradite to the US for various "human rights" reasons (Roman Polanski, Ira Einhorn, UK computer boy), etc.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Vibio said:
I'll say it again, this time let's see if you get it: Interrogations in the Questura are not taped.

And this by the way is not just Italy. It is the same for Germany (from what I remember I believe it's because of their Nazi past... although at this moment I can't find verification on that)

( And by the way: did the Knox defense team file a complaint about this... or was it even mentioned during the trail?)

But please, insist...
Click to expand...

I apologize for repetition since I was watching the HAWKS and missed much of this, but interrogations are recorded as per Mignini not this one because of the budget or perhaps a missing index finger.

The defense surely did bring it up and that's why the ISC ruled the statements couldn't be used in the murder trial only the notes. Massei allowed the statements into the calunnia trial which inexplicably ran concurrently. Maybe they did that to speed up the the process :rolleyes:
 
Is vibio really suggesting that Italy is so backward that its police did not have recording equipment in 2007? He is! LOL.
 
anglolawyer said:
Luminol is used to reveal blood that has been cleaned up. Amanda walked around in her bare feet depositing the victim's blood and then cleaned it up but she left behind enough to react with luminol so she was caught out. Now, she cannot have cleaned up her own bloody prints but left Guede's by accident. She must have left his prints deliberately, meaning she knew they were there and could see them. She had to be able to see them in order not to clean them up by mistake. There are no partially cleaned up prints of his (not so far as I am aware). That being so, since she knew the prints were right there on the floor and visible (even if faint) and since she was controlling the crime scene, why not point them out along with all the other things she pointed out that implicated Guede - like the crap, the staged burglary and all? I mean what was the idea in leaving them but not pointing them out?

Of course, only guilters need attempt an answer because, as with all these things, the pro-innocence theory has the simpler explanation: she didn't point them out because she had no idea they were there since they were too faint to see and she did not know any bloody prints had been deposited.
Click to expand...


I want to know how she perfectly cleaned her print at marker 2 in the hall while leaving the overlapping visible print of Rudy's intact.


picture.php
 
Grinder said:
...but interrogations are recorded as per Mignini not this one because of the budget
Click to expand...


"Look, that’s, I was at the police station, and all the…let’s say…when I made investigations in my own office, I taped them. I taped them, we have an apparatus for that, and I transcribed them. For example, there’s the interrogation of the English girls, Meredith’s friends, it was all taped. The interrogations of Amanda in prison were taped, and then transcribed, and we have the transcripts of… But in a police station, at the very moment of the investigation it isn’t done, not with respect to Amanda or anyone else. "
 
Last edited:
anglolawyer said:
Is vibio really suggesting that Italy is so backward that its police did not have recording equipment in 2007? He is! LOL.
Click to expand...


Reading 101: videotaping apparatus. And If you think that's strange please see link at post #6444
 
Last edited:
anglolawyer said:
Is vibio really suggesting that Italy is so backward that its police did not have recording equipment in 2007? He is! LOL.
Click to expand...

Here is a relevant section of Mignini's CNN interview (emphasis added):
12’51’’ CNN: Why wasn’t there any video or transcript of those hours?
13’00’’ Mignini: Look, that’s, I was at the police station, and all the…let’s say…when I made investigations in my own office, I taped them. I taped them, we have an apparatus for that, and I transcribed them. For example, there’s the interrogation of the English girls, Meredith’s friends, it was all taped. The interrogations of Amanda in prison were taped, and then transcribed, and we have the transcripts of… But in a police station, at the very moment of the investigation it isn’t done, not with respect to Amanda or anyone else. Also because, I can tell you, today, even then, but today in particular, we have budget problems, budget problems that are not insignificant, which do not allow us to transcribe. Video is very important…I completely agree with you that videotaping is extremely important, we should be able to have a video recording of every statement [verbale di assunzione di informazioni] made Because what is said is very important, but it’s maybe even more important how it is said, the non-verbal language. Because from the non-verbal language you can [missing words].
15’14’’ Mignini: It isn’t only Amanda, it’s always like that. But I wanted to say that I agree with him that it’s fundamental, only there’s a problem, especially when the witnesses are so numerous, and in fact just recording, I mean recording the sound, isn’t enough according to me.
http://amandx-knox-interrogation.wikispaces.com/Mignini-CNN-interview
Click to expand...

So he had audio recording equipment in his own office, but not in a police interrogation room for what was probably their highest profile case in decades? Hard to believe. As I read this, Mignini was rationalizing the absence of video recordings as a budgetary issue. I don't believe that either, but they did have audio recording equipment, and it sounds like they recorded everything except Amanda and Raffaele's interrogation. And the explanation would be what, exactly?
 
No Mignini is correct. It is not done by the police at the time of interrogation.

BTW: What did Knox's defence team have to say about the fact that her interrogation was not recorded? It's been discussed for 100s of pages here... so her lawyers must have really made a stink about it...if it's so unusual... what exactly did they have to say?
 
Last edited:
suspicious minds

anglolawyer said:
Is vibio really suggesting that Italy is so backward that its police did not have recording equipment in 2007? He is! LOL.
Click to expand...
anglolawyer,

Barbie said (p. 52) that they installed a camera (which apparently could also record sound) in the waiting room because they were suspicious of the pair. Maybe that consumed their entire budget.
 
Bob001 said:
Here is a relevant section of Mignini's CNN interview (emphasis added):

12’51’’ CNN: Why wasn’t there any video or transcript of those hours?
13’00’’ Mignini: Look, that’s, I was at the police station, and all the…let’s say…when I made investigations in my own office, I taped them. I taped them, we have an apparatus for that, and I transcribed them. For example, there’s the interrogation of the English girls, Meredith’s friends, it was all taped. The interrogations of Amanda in prison were taped, and then transcribed, and we have the transcripts of… But in a police station, at the very moment of the investigation it isn’t done, not with respect to Amanda or anyone else. Also because, I can tell you, today, even then, but today in particular, we have budget problems, budget problems that are not insignificant, which do not allow us to transcribe. Video is very important…I completely agree with you that videotaping is extremely important, we should be able to have a video recording of every statement [verbale di assunzione di informazioni] made Because what is said is very important, but it’s maybe even more important how it is said, the non-verbal language. Because from the non-verbal language you can [missing words].
15’14’’ Mignini: It isn’t only Amanda, it’s always like that. But I wanted to say that I agree with him that it’s fundamental, only there’s a problem, especially when the witnesses are so numerous, and in fact just recording, I mean recording the sound, isn’t enough according to me.
http://amandx-knox-interrogation.wik...-CNN-interview
Click to expand...

So he had audio recording equipment in his own office, but not in a police interrogation room for what was probably their highest profile case in decades? Hard to believe. As I read this, Mignini was rationalizing the absence of video recordings as a budgetary issue. I don't believe that either, but they did have audio recording equipment, and it sounds like they recorded everything except Amanda and Raffaele's interrogation. And the explanation would be what, exactly?
Click to expand...

It's just so hilarious. He's exactly like Jon Lovitz' character Tommy Flanagan, the pathological liar.

"Uh...sure I taped 'em, yeah, and ....uh...I transcribed 'em, too, yeah, that's what happened....but we had budget problems, see, and if you can't videotape the nonverbal language then you might as well just forget the whole thing....so that's what we did...yeah, that's the ticket..."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom