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

[Mary_H]

I believe him, Anna Donnino, Edgardo Giobbi...
Do you think I should believe instead a girl who, about what she did and witnessed, she only knows one thing, that is she doesn't know what the truth is... ?

Mignini et al believed her. Are you better than him?

 

[Mary_H]

Oh gosh... and I've been holding back.

Taking ten posts to say what you could have said in one post is holding back?

 

[Diocletus]

Already said: she needed to appoint one, but could not confer.

LOL. Unfortunately for him, he used the statements that she made without a lawyer to convict her, and that's a violation of her human rights. It would have been better if he had provided her with access to a lawyer and not used her lawyerless statements to convict her.

He remembered very well to tell her about the need to apoint a lawyer, and also said she could not confer with him, he wrote this prohibition on the decree of arrest declaring Knox a formal suspect.

LOL. You mean the decree where he mentions all of the false evidence? Yeah, this "prohibition" was illegal.

Anyway, no one cares about his decree--it's not a knowing and intentional waiver of counsel by Amanda Knox. It's a bunch of after-the-fact rationalizations and lies by Mignini.

 

[Vibio]

Wow. Denied a lawyer!

False evidence.

What did the US State Department (who monitored this case) have to say about Knox being thrown in jail after all this?

It must be scathing.

 

[RoseMontague]

Wow. Denied a lawyer!

False evidence.

What did the US State Department (who monitored this case) have to say about Knox being thrown in jail after all this?

It must be scathing.

You can try a Google search. I don't think anyone is too much interested in helping you find things after this last time.

 

[Bill Williams]

No. Knox was not undergoing any interrogation. Her interrogation was over since hours, there was nothing to "continue".
Mignini does not ask if she wants to "continue" anything. There is nothing ongoing. Mignini tells her that she needs to appoint a lawyer and her rights, explains he cannot will not ask her questions, but says that if she has something to say and wants to make a declaration, she can do it and he would collect it under art. 350 § 7.
And Knox decides to release a statement.

I'm curious. Why are you defending Mignini? Acc. to you and so far in the Italian courts, he's won.

What am I missing? You argue as if my rebuttal to your obvious spin has merit.... enough to deserve a counter argument.

I don't get it Machiavelli, you've won. Are you and Mignini in some unknown peril?

 

[Diocletus]

Wow. Denied a lawyer!

False evidence.

What did the US State Department (who monitored this case) have to say about Knox being thrown in jail after all this?

It must be scathing.

I'm sorry, what's the point here? The State Department didn't complain and so the illegal interrogation and denial of counsel were A-Okay?

I'm not aware of a USA State Department exception to the ECHR. Could you point it out?

And actually, they probably could have gotten away with denying a lawyer, if they didn't use her lawyerless statements to prejudice and convict her. But they did. Too bad.

 

[Vibio]

You can try a Google search. I don't think anyone is too much interested in helping you find things after this last time.

Found it!

Yeah, Ian Kelly really lambasts the unfairness of it all. Whew!

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

It takes more than one hand, and more than one bloody palm print, if the man has bloody hands.

Machiavelli,

Meredith must have been covered in blood, no? How is one to tell what blood came from her perhaps writhing on the floor or touching herself or someone else touching her. I do not believe you would expect to find a clear handprint on a body, just because someone moved her. I am at a disadvantage with the whole line of argument because I have not seen any pictures of the body to know what could possibly have been a result of someone moving her. Besides, there were towels found in the room, perhaps after he left a bloody handprint he wiped them on his pants and/or on towels. I am sure his hands were not pristine clean but neither were they dripping with enough blood to leave telltale handprints on her skin.

 

[anglolawyer]

I'm sorry, what's the point here? The State Department didn't complain and so the illegal interrogation and denial of counsel were A-Okay?

I'm not aware of a USA State Department exception to the ECHR. Could you point it out?

And actually, they probably could have gotten away with denying a lawyer, if they didn't use her lawyerless statements to prejudice and convict her. But they did. Too bad.

Let's concede nothing. Lack of legal counsel is just the start. Here is a recent post from IIP on ECHR issues

Just butting in here, since I'm a law clerk specialized in criminal law in the Netherlands who knows a bit about ECHR jurisprudence. I'm afraid double jeopardy won't provide cover here, since legally the case didn't end yet (and stil hasn't). The prosecution appealed to the ISC before the Hellman verdict became final and the ISC squashed the acquittal and send it back. The case won't become final until the ISC has ruled on it again.

In my opinion a far better bet (at a brief glance) would be to appeal to the ECHR on the following grounds:

- the defense didn't get the chance to interrogate Rudy Guede, whilst his testimony formed a critical part of the case against Amanda/Raffaele. Violation of the right to a fair trial and the right to interrogate witnesses a charge (art. 6, par 1 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights).
- the fact that the ISC told the court of appeal they had to assume that Guede didn't act alone because they had already reached this conclusion in Guede's separate trial. This conclusion wasn't fought by Guede's defense and Amanda's/Raffaele's defense team was never part of the proceedings against Guede. Violation of presumption of innocence. Violation of the right to be trialed by an impartial tribunal (art. 6, par 1 and 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights).
- the fact that the ISC went outside it's legal boundaries by basically telling the court of appeal how the evidence had to be interpreted. Violation of presumption of innocence. Violation of the right to be trialed by an impartial tribunal (art. 6, par 1 and 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights).

Sounds like this person knows a thing or two and these points also hardly scratch the surface. Mach gloats that the ECHR cannot overturn convictions (in practical terms I think this is incorrect) which means a finding of unfairness, no matter how serious, would not in his view make any difference to the justice of the convictions. Wow.

 

[RoseMontague]

Machiavelli,

Meredith must have been covered in blood, no? How is one to tell what blood came from her perhaps writhing on the floor or touching herself or someone else touching her. I do not believe you would expect to find a clear handprint on a body, just because someone moved her. I am at a disadvantage with the whole line of argument because I have not seen any pictures of the body to know what could possibly have been a result of someone moving her. Besides, there were towels found in the room, perhaps after he left a bloody handprint he wiped them on his pants and/or on towels. I am sure his hands were not pristine clean but neither were they dripping with enough blood to leave telltale handprints on her skin.

Unfortunately they were unable to test the towels because of incompetence involved in the collection of evidence, storing these wet bloody towels in plastic bags where they rotted. Go figure.

 

[Matthew Best]

Unfortunately they were unable to test the towels because of incompetence involved in the collection of evidence, storing these wet bloody towels in plastic bags where they rotted. Go figure.

How inconvenient!

 

[Kaosium]

And, is there physical evidence of Rudy Guede in the small bathroom?

Yes, on the bathmat. 'Attributing' it to Raffaele does not change the fact it looks more like Rudy's and there's much better support for it being his. That would include the fact he admitted to being in the murder room and the bathroom the night of the murder, that he'd gotten Meredith's blood on him without doubt and he left plenty of evidence of this from his hands and feet all over the cottage.

As for why Stefanoni didn't do y-str testing in that room, or at least never released them if she did, is a very good question. Why did she fail to look for male DNA in that bathroom given she knew for certain a male got blood on them during the course of the murder and said he went into the bathroom?

It's remarkable that no DNA of him was found together with Kercher's blood, only mixed traces with Knox's DNA and Knox's blood.

No, it's not remarkable it's just yet another reason the EDFs must be released.

Not even Massei bought that Amanda and Meredith's blood mixed in the bathroom. Swabbing Meredith's blood and then wiping far and wide in that same sink Amanda used is pretty much guaranteed to get you a mixed DNA sample where you couldn't possibly tell whether Amanda's contribution was from blood as Stefanoni admitted in court which Massei quoted in debunking the prosecution claim.

What you can do is look at the tapes of the swabbing of the sink and see what they did and realize that procedure pretty much assures a mixed DNA sample of the ones that lived there and used the sink every day.

 

[Kaosium]

No. Knox was not undergoing any interrogation. Her interrogation was over since hours, there was nothing to "continue".
Mignini does not ask if she wants to "continue" anything. There is nothing ongoing. Mignini tells her that she needs to appoint a lawyer and her rights, explains he cannot will not ask her questions, but says that if she has something to say and wants to make a declaration, she can do it and he would collect it under art. 350 § 7.
And Knox decides to release a statement.

Then they locked her in solitary for two days and gave her a notebook, not allowing either her or Raffaele to see a lawyer until the moment the hearing before Matteini started.

 

[kwill]

As I stated earlier, the fact that the Italian prosecution so shamelessly exploited private and personal information about the defendants in the press emphasizes the value they place on fighting their cases in the media.

It's amazing from this side of the Atlantic.
a. Police plant false stories (I was there, e.g.)
b. Lay judges read false stories
c. Professional judges "help" lay judges sort out which press accounts are reliable in determining guilt.

This is not a court I would trust with the future of a tomato.

I'm reminded of the disgraceful behavior of Dick Cheney during the selling of the Iraq war . . . plant misleading stories with helpful NYT reporter, wait until stories are printed, go on television & point to "reporting" that helps promote your position.

I keep going back to the assumption in Italy that the authorities can ALWAYS be 100% trusted to be acting in good faith on the behalf of average citizens. It's mind-boggling, especially when it comes to this case.

At first I was sure I was reading it wrong . . . the court asserting that Stephanoni could be trusted because she was honest and doing a good job and had no reason to muddle the evidence.

 

[Vibio]

Sounds like this person knows a thing or two

Ian Kelly Spokesman for the US State Department:

MR. KELLY: (....) The role of our consular officers, in any (inaudible), is to ensure that – (a) that the person who is charged has access to legal counsel, and we keep lists of appropriate legal counsel at every embassy. And then as the process goes on, it is the responsibility of our consular officials to make sure that American citizens are treated fairly under local law.

............
QUESTION: Is it your belief that Amanda – excuse me, Amanda Knox was treated fairly under local law?

MR. KELLY: Well, I don’t have any indications to the contrary. I do know that our Embassy in Rome was very closely involved in this.

---------
QUESTION: And just to define that, the next step with the appeal, what specifically does the U.S. or the Consular service do in terms of that appeal? Do they study it? They – you know, what concretely are they doing to analyze this?

MR. KELLY: Well, I think it’s our role as – our diplomatic role to ensure that American citizens are treated fairly and that they have access to appropriate legal counsel. And that will continue to be our role as this process plays out.

-------------
QUESTION: I’m sorry. Usually when there’s a case – there have been numerous cases of American citizens where you think that the trial was not fair and it was clearly a case in which the American citizen was not guilty. And I’ve heard you and other people --

MR. KELLY: Those are normally places where there isn’t a transparent judicial system. There is a fair, open, and transparent legal system in Italy. We’re not talking about a country where we have problems with their legal system.

 

[Diocletus]

Ian Kelly Spokesman for the US State Department:

MR. KELLY: (....) The role of our consular officers, in any (inaudible), is to ensure that – (a) that the person who is charged has access to legal counsel, and we keep lists of appropriate legal counsel at every embassy. And then as the process goes on, it is the responsibility of our consular officials to make sure that American citizens are treated fairly under local law.

............
QUESTION: Is it your belief that Amanda – excuse me, Amanda Knox was treated fairly under local law?

MR. KELLY: Well, I don’t have any indications to the contrary. I do know that our Embassy in Rome was very closely involved in this.

---------
QUESTION: And just to define that, the next step with the appeal, what specifically does the U.S. or the Consular service do in terms of that appeal? Do they study it? They – you know, what concretely are they doing to analyze this?

MR. KELLY: Well, I think it’s our role as – our diplomatic role to ensure that American citizens are treated fairly and that they have access to appropriate legal counsel. And that will continue to be our role as this process plays out.

-------------
QUESTION: I’m sorry. Usually when there’s a case – there have been numerous cases of American citizens where you think that the trial was not fair and it was clearly a case in which the American citizen was not guilty. And I’ve heard you and other people --

MR. KELLY: Those are normally places where there isn’t a transparent judicial system. There is a fair, open, and transparent legal system in Italy. We’re not talking about a country where we have problems with their legal system.

You should send that to Italy. They can use it as Exhibit A to their brief on why it's not so bad that they violated Knox's human rights.

 

[kcoh]

Sollecito gave an interview to People magazine today. Many people were assuming that he would turn against Knox for a lighter sentence, but they have vowed to support each other. He says that he made the decision to return to Italy from the Dominican Republic despite his friends and family telling him not to. He says that he will continue to fight this injustice even though it is hard for him. He said he has nothing to hide.

You will have to Google it because I am not allowed to post links yet.

 

[Vibio]

You should send that to Italy. They can use it as Exhibit A to their brief on why it's not so bad that they violated Knox's human rights.

Ah yes... and you can send to the ECHR screen shots of this forum: 10 people debating over and over ...ad nauseam... about how Amanda Knox was treated unfairly.

I'm sure they'll take notice.

 

[RoseMontague]

Sollecito gave an interview to People magazine today. Many people were assuming that he would turn against Knox for a lighter sentence, but they have vowed to support each other. He says that he made the decision to return to Italy from the Dominican Republic despite his friends and family telling him not to. He says that he will continue to fight this injustice even though it is hard for him. He said he has nothing to hide.

You will have to Google it because I am not allowed to post links yet.

Thanks. And welcome to the forum.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20784070,00.html