• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's the Guardian's take on the motivations report:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ed-because-of-stunning-flaws-in-investigation

It sounds like the ISC is arguing exactly what most of us here have been arguing for years: 1) There is not - and there never was - any credible, reliable evidence of Knox's or Sollecito's participation in the murder; 2) All the evidence in fact points to Guede acting alone; 3) There were serious errors of omission, malpractice and incompetence in the investigation.
 
Don't shoot me for asking the question, but will there be crossexamination of anyone who is giving testimony? (I ask because there have been times - maybe one - where someone was allowed into a courtroom, had a letter they'd proportedly written, read for them, then they exited before opposition lawyers were allowed at him.)

Will Machiavelli be tweeting a fair rendering of such cross examination? Or will Machiavelli simply tweet how annoyed Mignini got?

It's good, though, that the young lad and the former-PM are finally in the same room. Wonder if we'll get all sorts of scoops once Mach is back home and can post here? Maybe Mignini and Machiavelli will discuss the final ISC motivations report over wine tonight.

Did you say Machiavelli and Mignini in the same room? That settles that, I guess.
 
Here's the Guardian's take on the motivations report:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ed-because-of-stunning-flaws-in-investigation

It sounds like the ISC is arguing exactly what most of us here have been arguing for years: 1) There is not - and there never was - any credible, reliable evidence of Knox's or Sollecito's participation in the murder; 2) All the evidence in fact points to Guede acting alone; 3) There were serious errors of omission, malpractice and incompetence in the investigation.

What are 'the stunning errors'?
 
Did you say Machiavelli and Mignini in the same room? That settles that, I guess.

We're guaranteed to get to your plateau-target of 25 continuations in this thread if a fight breaks out over whether or not this means that Machiavelli has "met" Mignini.
 
Here's two paragraphs on the calunnia from the two articles linked above:

FROM Processo Meredith, la Cassazione: "Clamorosi errori nell'inchiesta"
...

///

Snip

///

Certainty
In "troubled path and inherently contradictory," the Kercher murder trial is a "just because of irrefutable certainty: the guilt of Amanda Knox in order to slanderous accusations against Patrick Lumumba." It underlines the Supreme Court in the grounds of absolution of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. The judgment notes that the libel was confirmed by the same Knox in an "abnormal immune to psychological pressure." Thus, "a possible ruling by the European Court of Justice in favor of" the appeal in which Knox denounced "an unorthodox treatment of the investigators to him," could not "in any way tarnish" the final step in the court decision of guilt for slander, "not even in view of possible revision of the judgment, considering that the slanderous accusations that the same defendant turned to Lumumba as a result of the alleged coercion, were also confirmed by her before the PM, during the interrogation, therefore a context institutionally immune to abnormal psychological pressure. " Furthermore, such allegations - says the Supreme Court - "were also confirmed in the memorial" signed by Knox "at a time when the same accuser was alone with himself and his conscience, in terms of objective tranquility, away from environmental conditioning" .
...

It seems like they're saying accusing Lumumba is Amanda's fault, because she repeated it when she spoke to Mignini, and also wrote it in one of her memoriales. But they seem to ignore her questioning the truth of the memory, and the possibility that she's suffering from confusion as a result of the 'alleged pressures'.

But they do seem to almost anticipate a favorable ruling at the ECHR on the issue, due to the circumstances under which Amanda statements was originally extracted, and that everything that comes after it is therefore going to get tossed (even though their interpretation of it is silly).

So I'm reading this as cassation is aware Amanda's appeal to ECHR will be granted in favor, and a revision trial in Italy will toss the calunnia conviction and expunge the conviction. (Bye-bye Patrick's "damages award").

But on this issue, cassation seems to be blaming Amanda for 'clinging to her story' when no pressure was present (indeed, to which such pressure was and is, "institutionally abnormal").

So looks like they slammed the investigation, and are protecting the "institution" (i.e., Mignini).

This suggests some low level people, like Ficarra, Zugarini, Napoleone, and maybe some other police, will be criticized, and maybe disciplined. Mignini will officially skate, but I predict he retires (gets the boot, with full retirement benefits) before the end of the year.

Case closed. (Until ECHR tosses this mess).





Interesting that they address the calunnia charge/conviction. I thought that was not before the court. Am I mistaken? It certainly looks like an admission by the ISC that at least initially the rights of AK were violated and subject to ECHR sanction. Interesting that they are making their defense known ahead of time to the ECHR. Her later actions IMO are still "fruit of the poisonous tree".

Also, it is strangely coincidental that this decision, and statements (apparently) about calunnia will be submitted just as the other satellite trial of AK is underway.

Now that the MR is out there for consumption - I assume a copy will be forthcoming - we can sit and wait for the decision by the ECHR, and response by the Italian government. I fully expect this within a short ten years or so.
 
Interesting that they address the calunnia charge/conviction. I thought that was not before the court. Am I mistaken? It certainly looks like an admission by the ISC that at least initially the rights of AK were violated and subject to ECHR sanction. Interesting that they are making their defense known ahead of time to the ECHR. Her later actions IMO are still "fruit of the poisonous tree".

Also, it is strangely coincidental that this decision, and statements (apparently) about calunnia will be submitted just as the other satellite trial of AK is underway.

Now that the MR is out there for consumption - I assume a copy will be forthcoming - we can sit and wait for the decision by the ECHR, and response by the Italian government. I fully expect this within a short ten years or so.

LOL!

So far there is no distinction, really, between this and Hellmann's M.R.

Speculation: once again, a court in Italy throws a bone to the Perugians. Calunnia had more than one function - initially it was solely so as to bring the interrogation into the courtroom, otherwise disallowed to be used in the murder trial.

Yet Italian process seems to allow a lot of leakage. The best thing about this 52 pages is that the whle thing is finally over.

Well, all except the ECHR..... will anyone of us be around when this is finally put to bed?
 
Less is more. I could explan it in a few paragraphs.

Sure you could, but you're not a handsomely paid Supreme Court judge. It is their job to give precise reasoning and quoting exact legal points and precedent case law.

They do not have the jurisdiction to find the pair not guilty.
 
Last edited:
Did you say Machiavelli and Mignini in the same room? That settles that, I guess.

Ah, but what if Mignini is tweeting in the third person, as in "Mignini is annoyed!"?

ETA, er, or is that tweeting in both 2nd and 3rd person?
 
Last edited:
Don't you think those Mafia connections might have come through a little sooner? I mean, why put them through 7 years of hell at a cost of millions of euros? Just make Mignini an offer he can't refuse and bosh! Sorted.

But you are so right. The world is a very corrupt place in which unjust things happen to ordinary, innocent people.

They did : enter Hellmann.
 
Amanda's drug empire was so successful she became a capo di tutti capi, masterminding her operation from her jail cell in Capanne. All the prison guards ended up in her pocket. Now, while she lives an outwardly Bohemian life on her olive oil ranch in Washington, a blood-soaked battle is raging through the Italian courts between her devoted followers and the demented Mignini and his dwindling crew of brigands, ne-er do wells, judges on the payroll, ice cream vendors ... (Continued on page 94)

Vixen - the above is a segment of the plot of the book you advised me to write. Can you run your eye over it and give me some feedback?

I know you're laughing at this, but Mignini accused Mario Spezi of orchestrating an international PR campaign from his cell at capanne, during the three weeks in April 2006 when Mignini & Giuttari had him imprisoned there, accused as a (one of the) 'mastermind' in the Monster of Florence serial killings.

According to preston/Spezi's account in MOF, that was the straw that broke the camel's back for the hearing judge, and Spezi was released at that point.

So, don't underestimate the potential inanity of Mignini's possible claims; there is nothing too ludicrous for Mignini to assert, and at some point probably has.
 
What did she say to Mignini when not under pressure that confirmed her accusation of Patrick?

Dec 17, 2007 (?) interview with Mignini, she tried to explain it. She said at the time, she thought it might be true.

Does anyone know if there is a transcript from that hearing with Mignini?
 
Being acquainted means nothing. I'm acquainted with the mini mart clerk, that doesn't mean we killed someone last night. At least with Patrick there was the exchange of texts. With Rudy there is NOTHING. Do you have any calls between them? NO. Texts? NO. E-mails? NO. Any CCTV footage of Amanda or Raffaele out that night when they said they were in? NO.

Can you prove that they got together that night? NO. Any night? NO.

You have a fantasy that they got together and that's all. Not a shred of evidence to support it.

It should take a hell of a lot more than that to convict someone.

Do you seriously believe "Kevin Wade" aka "The Baron" who spent his time chatting up American students never had a mobile phone? He almost certainly had an anonymous disposable one, especially if he was supplying drugs.
 
Sure you could, but you're not a handsomely paid Supreme Court judge. It is their job to give precise reasoning and quoting exact legal points and precedent case law.

They do not have the jurisdiction to find the pair not guilty.

Apparently they did.
 
Never mind that NONE of this happened. These girls lived in a cottage above 4 men. One of which Mez was sleeping with. Every single girl in that cottage smoked cannabis and the victim was watering those plants. In fact, there is no evidence actually that drugs of any kind are even peripherally involved in this murder. But, hey, why let a silly thing like the facts get in the way?

What so called "extreme" experiences? Better not let your kids out of your sight then. Because people smoke grass, drink and have sex. Especially at college. Sometimes even kids who don't go to college.

If you recall, fun-loving Amanda spent Halloween alone (ah, shame). Raff had an urge to enact his extreme manga comics, even to the extent of getting a massive tattoo of the biggest baddest manga character. Mez' murder was for futile disgusting reason. You only support Amanda because she comes from Seattle and one day might personally thank you <nudge nudge, wink, wink> for your support.

Congrats!
 
This just in. ROME - Italy's top criminal court says it threw out murder convictions against Amanda Knox and her former Italian boyfriend because there was absolutely no proof they were at the scene of her British roommate's slaying.

The Court of Cassation on Monday issued its formal written explanation, as required by Italian law, for its March ruling vindicating the pair once and for all in the legal battle over the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy.

The court wrote there was an "absolute lack of biological traces" of Knox, an American, or co-defendant Raffaele Sollecitio in the room or on the body of the victim. Slamming the quality of the prosecution's case, the court faulted the investigators for "blameworthy omissions of investigative activity."

Their use of the term, "absolute lack of biological traces" condemns them as thoroughly corrupt and unscrupulous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom