Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[lonepinealex]

I don't think you are being dim. Not at all.

I am getting reports, echoing Vibio's on this very thread, that the Porta a Porta broadcast (on a major Italian network) was seen as generally very favourable to Raffaele. What played well, apparently, were the character statements from Raffaele's home town. The Bruno-interviewer was seen as very tough on Raffaele, so as to be seen not to be giving R. a free ride - probably similar to CNN's Chris Cuomo who lit in to Amanda Knox when she was on his show - but which left Cuomo (IIRC) quipping later that he was impressed with her and felt she was probably innocent.

There is a possibility here that Cassazione is looking for a solution to this that avoids sending a local, well-regarded Italian son to prison, while at the same time risking opening up the Italian "judicial truths" about all this to international scrutiny. (Then again Cassazione might not care about that!)

The thing which is hard to accept on my side of the Atlantic is that courts could be so swayed by internal public opinion. Here, "the public good" is factored into the charge process, not the final appeal-disposition!

Still none of this really deals with your question. One can only hope that Section 5 of Cassazione connects the dots the way you are doing.

I wasn't really connecting any dots. I don't hold out much hope of the Italian justice system suddenly coming up trumps with a decision that makes any sense.

 

[Diocletus]

Even though Vespa let his skepticism show through, he was, over all, very light on Raff...yet I think anyone watching the show would get the impression Vespa personally believes Raff is guilty.

Really? Was he rolling his eyes or scowling or something?

 

[Diocletus]

I do see something on the sleeve, over to the right side, that looks like a thumb print. In the middle of the jacket, I also see a square shape that appears to correspond to the belt buckle that can be seen off to the left.

The belt buckle (actually, its a buckle from the belt on the boot) thing is weird. In order for the print to be on the jacket, the buckle first had to have blood on it. Then, the jacket was pressed onto it (or vice versa). But it's kind of strange that the imprint is so defined and not a big blotch--suggests that the amount of blood and contact pressure were limited.

 

[Vibio]

Really? Was he rolling his eyes or scowling or something?

He was being interview by Bruno Vespa, not Katie Couric.

 

[Diocletus]

He was being interview by Bruno Vespa, not Katie Couric.

Thank heavens for small favors.

But you said that that he was skeptical and that we would be able to tell that he thought Sollecito was guilty (well, we would if we were favored with the grand gift of Italian literacy). So?

 

[Vibio]

We're pretty much on the same page!

That's right Bill... we're pretty much on the same page!

As I said: Raff was evasive, insincere, cocky. He sounded like someone lying. And: anyone watching the show would get the impression Vespa personally believes Raff is guilty.


(Hey Bill... maybe you've put in too many hours today...)

 

[Vibio]

But you said that that he was skeptical and that we would be able to tell that he thought Sollecito was guilty (well, we would if we were favored with the grand gift of Italian literacy). So?

Well, for starters, he didn't reach out and hold Raff's hand as Robin Roberts did in her interview with Knox.

That was the first clue.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

when was the bra removed

Perhaps the bra was removed shortly before her death. In any case, the pillow was pushed under Meredith's body to facilitate the tearing or cutting off of the bra. Otherwise the clasp would not have been found under her back.

All the best

Wannaknow,

Meredith was probably still breathing when the bra was removed. "She was wearing shoe covers and sterile gloves. 'I then saw this girl who was on the floor with her face lying towards the right of the viewer, with a terrible wound. Was semi-naked, had the t-shirt rolled up above the breast and lots of blood and spatters of blood even on the breast'" (p. 104, Massei Report, English translation).

 

[Annella]

From an Italian Forensic Science site, this! (from a few years ago)

A google translation. Original linked.


http://www.sos-scienzeforensi.org/i...icle&id=9:delitto-perugia&catid=14&Itemid=122

The turning point in the appeal against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, next hearing on July 25, unleashed criticism of the experts against investigations and scientific evidence. Monster of Florence, Unabomber, Cogne, Yellow Garlasco, murder of Marta Russo, crime of Perugia ... just some of the major cases of crime that confirm, along with dozens of stories less known to the public, the decline of Criminal Italian. Autopsies and repeated inspections, investigative practices and laboratory tests peppered with blunders, omissions absurd and fanciful conclusions; expert reports supported by scientific theories outdated and ... judgments.
This is because the police Scientific and Ris Carabinieri to innovation are lagging behind, being devoid of staff able to update through direct knowledge of the latest research in English written by experts Anglo-Saxon, German, Israeli ...

Edoardo Mori, a retired magistrate after he was before the investigating judge, magistrate, and then finally to the courts: "I am asking for an expert opinion to the Scientific or Ris - says the former judge who runs the site where earmi.it collects, among other things, errors and horrors of scientific studies and not - as are those on the health of a joint call for information to the orderly. "Marco Morin, among the world's leading experts in ballistics, "Sometimes the assumptions are based investigative processed by police Digos of expert reports produced by their colleagues in the Scientific." Giuseppe Fortuni, professor of forensic medicine at Bologna with four decades of experience in the field: "Despite all the scientific techniques of investigation are less guilty than before."
And former General Luciano Garofano, long head of Ris of Parma, admits the cultural lag, "The police has made leaps and bounds in the technique of the inspection and the laboratory tests, but much remains to be done. At the crime scene should go only pure specialists that we have not. "

In short, pm and judges have too much confidence in the investigation laboratory tests. And the so-called comparative (advice of the expert witnesses) than to construct alternative tests are directed to "dismantle" incontrovertible certainties deemed by the prosecution. You will not need to find the culprit, but at least, and not cheap, may prevent an innocent end up in jail. Obstinacy pm and allowing judges.
It was said of major cases of crime dotted appraisals wrong. Let's just two areas: the gunshot residue and DNA testing. In the trial against Peter Pacciani, we are in 1992, the Court of Assizes of Florence had asked three so-called experts to check whether a baby doll and a diaper Baby had been used to wrap or clean firearms and if on them there were traces of gunpowder compatible with 22-caliber ammunition (those of the so-called gun monster of Florence, never found).
Responding to the first question the experts attributed to sprint weapon 9mm footprint black formed by two concentric blacks found on the fabric. And part of the consultants had good game in demolishing the expertise in that there was no gun with the barrel 4.5 mm thick, which is capable of leaving an impression like that.
Crime of Perugia.

The courts of appeal trial against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, who were convicted for the murder of Meredith Kercher, has arrived in recent weeks an expertise that puts a strain on the truths on which was based the decision at first instance. But, unfortunately, the public trust in the so-called scientific evidence able to nail the culprit.
The DNA found on the so-called murder weapon could not be that of the victim, the bra Mez traces were found more males ... The experts concluded by writing: "Do not you followed the international procedures of inspection and protocols collection and sampling. "And then we wonder whether the United States follow the story with an apprehension similar to that harboring towards a process (against an American) celebrated in Sudan or in Malawi.

Because the limit of the scientific evidence is not scientific: if the crime scene did not observe very strict protocols, all laboratory tests are likely to be perfectly useless.

 

[Vibio]

From an Italian Forensic Science site, this!

LOL. Vincenzo Pricolo.

 

[Bill Williams]

That's right Bill... we're pretty much on the same page!

As I said: Raff was evasive, insincere, cocky. He sounded like someone lying. And: anyone watching the show would get the impression Vespa personally believes Raff is guilty.


(Hey Bill... maybe you've put in too many hours today...)

..... except for the evaluative remarks. Perhaps we're both seeing this through our own confirmation bias; but in the main what I am hearing is that he came across as genuine and believable because of Vespa's stance towards the interview - as not giving him a free ride.

Your mileage varies.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

The editorial department of the show... the artistic direction.... was indeed favorable to Raff.

Raff's performance was quite another matter however: he was evasive, insincere, cocky. He sounded like someone lying.

BTW: this was not just a "major Italian network", it was on Italy's State run premier network.



True. Again: the editorial choices that the show made... the choice to film in his hometown, keeping the interviewees limited to old friends. And it was all indeed favorable to Raff. <snip>

Any indication of Italian public reaction to the show; is there any sign of a groundswell of public opinion supporting Raffaele Sollecito or is it too soon to tell?

 

[Diocletus]

Well, for starters, he didn't reach out and hold Raff's hand as Robin Roberts did in her interview with Knox.

That was the first clue.

That's what you are basing this great observation off of? Unimpressed.

 

[Dougm]

I'd be surprised if there is any groundswell of public opinion one way or another at this point. Most of the public is relying on the courts to let them know what actually happened. It is a shame they are so pathetically failing in their role.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

What a strange comparison

Also (as an aside): Vespa cannot be compared to Cuomo. There are no US TV journalists left that can compare to Vespa. The last was probably Mike Wallace.

Vibio,

Some Italians think that Vespa swims with the current.

 

[Desert Fox]

I'd be surprised if there is any groundswell of public opinion one way or another at this point. Most of the public is relying on the courts to let them know what actually happened. It is a shame they are so pathetically failing in their role.

There are people who still believe the West Memphis Three and Norfolk Four are guilty so people can be pretty pathetic.

My sister actually watched the Medical Detective show on the Norfolk Four (which I wish I could get a hold of a copy of that show) and thought it showed them as guilty.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I think it'll be confirmed and Raffaele will be arrested immediately if he doesn't run. The police will be waiting outside wherever he lives waiting for confirmation there's been a definitive conviction. A few weeks after that, Italy will request extradition and Amanda will be arrested immediately and taken to SeaTac. She'll apply for bail which has a small chance of being granted and her appeals will go on for years all the way up to the Supreme Court. <snip>

The extradition process still is not clear to me. If Raffaele and Amanda’s convictions are confirmed, does the US DoJ lawyers act on Italy’s behalf or Amanda’s in the extradition process?

 

[Desert Fox]

The extradition process still is not clear to me. If Raffaele and Amanda’s convictions are confirmed, does the US DoJ lawyers act on Italy’s behalf or Amanda’s in the extradition process?

It depends. . . .If it is seen as a political conviction, Department of State responds "Nope." I think a strong argument can be made that it was a political conviction.

 

[Bill Williams]

The extradition process still is not clear to me. If Raffaele and Amanda’s convictions are confirmed, does the US DoJ lawyers act on Italy’s behalf or Amanda’s in the extradition process?

IIUC they act on "the truth's" behalf. They will probably make a political determination as to whether or not Amanda's rights (as defined as if the thing had been in the US) has been seen to - and I purposely say "political determination", because that is very different than a judicial determination. The judicial role seems only to be for a federal judge to grant a certificate of extradition (or some such thing), which in itself has the same authority as a "search warrant", meaning that the cops are not legally bound to execute the search just that they have the legal authority to do so. An extradition warrant would give the State Department the legal authority (within the US) to extradite if they so chose, but would not require extradition.

The one extradition that I've looked into most closely was one going the other way, an escaped con, Laurie Bembenek who escaped a Wisconsin prison where she was serving a murder sentence and made her way into Canada.

When Wisconsin requested extradition Canada decided to interfere, because on the face of it, the original conviction had been full of holes. Canada insisted that a judicial review in Milwaukee of her whole case. If Wisconsin had not guaranteed that, Bembenek would probably have been given refugee status in Canada - as a convicted murderer! The judicial review did turn partially into Bembenek's favour.

So, I would imagine that the State Department's lawyers would have free rein, really, to act acc. to the directive the Secretary of State sets for them.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Confused of Coulsdon

It depends. . . .If it is seen as a political conviction, Department of State responds "Nope." I think a strong argument can be made that it was a political conviction.

IIUC they act on "the truth's" behalf. They will probably make a political determination as to whether or not Amanda's rights (as defined as if the thing had been in the US) has been seen to - and I purposely say "political determination", because that is very different than a judicial determination. The judicial role seems only to be for a federal judge to grant a certificate of extradition (or some such thing), which in itself has the same authority as a "search warrant", meaning that the cops are not legally bound to execute the search just that they have the legal authority to do so. An extradition warrant would give the State Department the legal authority (within the US) to extradite if they so chose, but would not require extradition.

The one extradition that I've looked into most closely was one going the other way, an escaped con, Laurie Bembenek who escaped a Wisconsin prison where she was serving a murder sentence and made her way into Canada.

When Wisconsin requested extradition Canada decided to interfere, because on the face of it, the original conviction had been full of holes. Canada insisted that a judicial review in Milwaukee of her whole case. If Wisconsin had not guaranteed that, Bembenek would probably have been given refugee status in Canada - as a convicted murderer! The judicial review did turn partially into Bembenek's favour.

So, I would imagine that the State Department's lawyers would have free rein, really, to act acc. to the directive the Secretary of State sets for them.

So which US government department represents Italy in an extradition process?