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

[RandyN]

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Respectfully, no. It's the US Department of Justice that acts for Italy, not the courts. The courts are constitutionally separate from the executive, of which the DoJ is part. The case will be Italy (represented by the DoJ) -v- Knox and the court will simply apply the law, not in the national or any other interest, but just that. The problem is in figuring out what the law actually is since there are conflicting strands of thought about whether sovereign treaty-making powers (comity of nations etc) or fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitootion should take precedence.

LJ says...

"Sorry yes. I meant to say that the DoJ acts as Italy's representative before the court. And, as you say, the court is tasked purely with applying justice (but the US flavour of justice!), taking into account all issues such as extradition treaties, arguments by the defendant, mitigating factors and other issues (such as, as you say, constitutional rights). "



Yes the DOJ will represent Italy much like the Russian judge represented the world when judging woman's skating.

But no matter. Whoever will be tasked to bring the ridiculous Italian case into court will have their legal hands full. And this time the defense gets to talk! Not that they couldn't in Italy...they just chose not to. They were not qualified and the proof is that they couldn't win THIS case! The opposite of confirmation bias.

No matter...a strong fearless defense will be put before a judge who could care less about Italy or John Kerry... of that you can be sure.

 

[Draca]

Was not this once used to prove Amanda had gone to the cottage at that time?

It's the whole thing with this case. There's "all the other evidence", a phrase that guilters trot out when each individual item is debunked. Yet for some reason, looking at this osmotically means you still get to keep this in play against Knox (and Sollecito) even after debunking. And evcen after it is ALL debunked, there's still an osmotic case against them.

Sort of like staring at a bright light, then closing your eyes and still seeing it. Doesn't matter that it is no longer there.

Yes, but the police said the video was 10 minutes FAST. Early on they were saying it was Amanda at 8:41 pm. Raffaele's friend spoke to Amanda at 8:40 pm at his place and that proved it could not have been her.

By the time it was presented in court on March 13, 2009 the police were saying the image was Meredith, but still at 8:41 pm.

http://news.sky.com/story/677096/cctv-of-meredith-at-home-before-her-murder

That made ZERO sense for the police to even claim, because they knew from interviewing Meredith's friends that it could not have been Meredith if that time was correct. Sophie Purton had said she walked with Meredith and she was at her home by 8:55 pm. Meredtih's walk from Sophie's would be about 5 minutes more, so a 9:01 pm arrival makes perfect sense with Sophie's statement.

It took the Bongiorno's postal police arrival demonstration in Sep. 2009 to prove the clock was 10 minutes SLOW, not FAST.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/postale.pdf

 

[Desert Fox]

Someone mentioned the possibility of getting her university involved. Not quite sure how to do this.

Mary H lives in Seattle . . .Question is if Amanda knows about this and if she approves? Some on this forum I think have some contact with her.
With teh way she has been hounded by the media, I would feel bad "Hey, I don't know you but. . . . ."

 

[lionking]

What? There is no way in hell she will ever get sent back to that country. Not in a million years.... more fantasies from Lionking.

Anglolawyer made essentially the same point. Is he fantasising too?

 

[Poppy1016]

Mary H lives in Seattle . . .Question is if Amanda knows about this and if she approves? Some on this forum I think have some contact with her.
With teh way she has been hounded by the media, I would feel bad "Hey, I don't know you but. . . . ."

Having as many supporters as Amanda seemingly has, it is appalling to me that only 2,000 are willing to sign the petition.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

that's the kicker

I was just wondering if Stephony or the prosecution gave any reason regarding how the clasp moved across the room.

Who knows? Here is my guess: link.

 

[Desert Fox]

Having as many supporters as Amanda seemingly has, it is appalling to me that only 2,000 are willing to sign the petition.

Odds are most likely they don't know about it. . . .
If you know any major places you can post this on, I ask you do it.

Look, she is an atheist so maybe more of the atheists groups.
Look what was done by the atheist community for Tracy McBain, Rebecca Vitsmun, and Damon Fowler.
I am going to begin writing every group I know starting tomorrow.

 

[Caper]

Anglolawyer made essentially the same point. Is he fantasising too?

No. He would be wrong, but based on sound analysis..... you would just be fantasizing.

 

[RandyN]

It was from December 17th 2007. But other than that, I agree with what you're saying here.

I think the answer might just have something to do with Vogt's irresponsible and journalistically-unethical closeness to Mignini and other prosecutors. You know, the sort of closeness that results in the "journalist" getting privileged access to prosecution material, in return for guarantees (either explicitly or implicitly) to promote the prosecution's position. The sort that no responsible, ethical journalist would ever allow himself/herself to do. That sort

Cant blame Vogt. She only did what she felt necessary to get a story... even if she got it wrong.

What is inexcusable and what has to be illegal is for whoever released this interrogation to have done so. Perhaps it is simply information already in the case files and we just never heard it before. Seems unlikely that no one else would have this found this "scoop" IMHO.

I think the BBC 3 thing helped RS/AK actually...it stirred the conversation about this case. And that is all that is necessary honestly. Even stupid people start saying "hey wait a minute" after being force fed too much BS. Which this case exclusively fed from beginning to end frankly.

This case is over in Italy...No venue is going to provide a place for retrial...the ISC will not consider evidence this time like it did last time....watch and see.

The only question is how long Italy will drag feet in requesting extradition.

There is also that other oddity in Italian law that allows another trial with a 3 judge panel even after a guilty confirmation by the ISC. That is certainly in the records and can be studied. Surprising actually that no one has bothered with that yet.

Seems like extradition hearing first...then failing that on to ECOHR...at least that is the way the terrorists of the world are working the system.

I worry that Knox has to run out of money sooner rather than later. She should sign up for welfare like that guy in the Netherlands...have some money for smokes anyway and get free public defense. Couldn't do worse than those clowns defending her in Italy did.

 

[RandyN]

Anglolawyer made essentially the same point. Is he fantasising too?

Yep...he is clueless on this particular point certainly.

 

[RandyN]

Having as many supporters as Amanda seemingly has, it is appalling to me that only 2,000 are willing to sign the petition.

It was a poorly designed petition. I didn't sign it! Actually there were two... one to POTUS and another to Kerry. Both are ill timed IMHO...in fact the Kerry one is just dumb.

This case has to flow thru the legal channels before we laugh it all the way back to Italy in a gondola or whatever.

Some little kid gets a million likes for skateboarding and doing mildly inappropriate things to unsuspecting girls on the sidewalk. So what?

Let em lock up RS... then the Italians will start howling.
Meanwhile Knox will remain free here and her defense will slaughter whoever gets the unfortunate task of trying to present this extradition case in a US court.

She ain't going anywhere! And it has nothing at all to do with petitions or political winds. We are a country of laws! Period full stop!

 

[Annella]

Having as many supporters as Amanda seemingly has, it is appalling to me that only 2,000 are willing to sign the petition.

Maybe ask Damien Echols at twitter and has 1000,s of followers. He supports Amanda and Raff...had dinner with Amanda a few nights ago.

I echo Randy's thoughts above. There have been calls to hold back on this for time being and is likely one of the reasons it has not been subscribed to by the multitudes!

 

[RWVBWL]

Who is "She"?

Whether the recent snippet of audio of Amanda's December 17, 2007 interrogation had been played in Italian media I can't say, but other parts of the interrogation were heard on Italian media. Who gave these audio bits to the media I don't know, however, it was several years ago.

I think there may even have been a mention and a link to the interrogation on this forum but I may be misremembering.

Greetings Christianahannah and others,
Does anyone know whom it was that was passing documents to journalists
that Frank Sfarzo wrote about regarding this from witness Alessandra Formica?:

‘SHE WAS PASSING DOCS TO THE JOURNALIST’. WHAT ARE YOU DOING, MIGNINI?

Other things came out in court. The witness Alessandra Formica, for instance, probably didn’t tell us who killed Meredith. But she told us, for what a journalist told her, who was leaking minutes of the investigation to the journalists.

Maybe the prosecutor didn’t hear it that day, let’s say like this. So, let’s remind him. Has he to investigate the cop for revealing secret of office or the witness for slander?

Link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110910...nox-and-raffaele-sollecito-there-was-nothing/

 

[Bob001]

.....
There is also that other oddity in Italian law that allows another trial with a 3 judge panel even after a guilty confirmation by the ISC. That is certainly in the records and can be studied. Surprising actually that no one has bothered with that yet.
....

What? So how does that work? If the Supreme Court affirms the guilty verdict, the case can still go to another panel? Who sends it there? And if the panel decides "not guilty," does the case go back to the Supreme Court, where they can decide "guilty" again, or send it to another appeals court? Or what? How is this possible? When does the process end?

 

[anglolawyer]

I think Lionking was suggesting that the political angle to any potential Knox extradition battle would make it more likely that she would be extradited.

Was he? Well I was making a different point about extradition being determined in the political rather than the judicial sphere.

I suspect that the overarching thrust of the Nencini report (judging from Nencini's ill-judged interviews post-verdict) will be as follows:

The court started with the previous SC ruling that there were multiple assailants. The court therefore required the defence teams to show convincingly either that a) this was an impossibility given the evidence, or b) there were convincing reasons why these other assailants were not Knox and Sollecito. The defence teams failed to do either of these things. Therefore we are obliged to accept that there were two other assailants, and that those two other assailants were Knox and Sollecito.

Of course, proving (a) is an impossibility, and it should never be incumbent upon the defence to prove it anyhow. Likewise, the defence should never have to prove the innocence of the defendants. And it should go without saying that no court in the trials process of Knox and Sollecito should be allowed - in law and in ethics - to start with a presumption generated by an entirely different trial process (in this instance, Guede's trials).

Reversal of the burden of proof will be of great interest to the ECHR.

My understanding is serving American armed forces personnel or government officials such as CIA agents, are not part of any extradition treaty.

Whether Amanda is or isn’t extradited really will come down to whether there would be a groundswell of public opinion against extradition.

I agree that will be important.

Well, what I think is important is that we have extradition treaties with nations who have justice systems that are fundamentally competent and fair. I'm sure that was the assumption at the time the us entered into the extradition treaty with Italy. But really, we should not be extraditing innocent us citizens at the whim of some face-saving, anti-American cabal in Italy. And frankly, Italy should not be requesting such.

That's why I think there are some significant steps to be taken within Italy and at the echr level before we even start talking about a us extradition proceeding. Any thought of extraditing Amanda Knox could get shut down long before a request ever makes it to the us authorities.

It would be fascinating to see Italy make a request while her (inevitable) ECHR appeal was pending.

What? There is no way in hell she will ever get sent back to that country. Not in a million years.... more fantasies from Lionking.

Caper, what do you base this on?

No ifs!!!...a legal case WILL BE brought against extradition. No politics involved. The Italians will be shown to be turd herding medieval liars with nothing resembling a legal system or case at all.

This case is not even close. It is absurd. And yes Italy will have upset an important (to them) ally.

A defense team here will not cower in fear nor will they remain silent if Italy chooses to come here to present their "facts". And if they simply send the case files then good luck with that...lol. I wonder if Stefanoni will include the EDF's for that?

No politics involved...those calling for petitions to Kerry to come out now against extradition are wasting their time and are foolish. We have rule of law. And the law will be followed in an extradition hearing. The Italians have contradicted themselves and provided and used false evidence and witnesses and relied on bogus science...this is easily proved in a honest court. Pick any motivation report and that would be enough. Nothing is more absurd than Massei although the latest ISC motivation comes damn close.

Get your house in order Italy. You are making yourselves look foolish to the world. Bunga bunga aside, even we got past Presidential blow jobs. You can do it too. First shake up your prosecutors and police and clean up that mess. Oh wait you have no method or system in place for that. Never mind. Carry on you silly jokes you.

I hope you are right that Italy will have to make out some kind of case in court but it's not what the treaty says. Hopefully her lawyers can use habeus corpus and the constitootion to trump the treaty.

Anglolawyer made essentially the same point. Is he fantasising too?

No. He would be wrong, but based on sound analysis..... you would just be fantasizing.

Yep...he is clueless on this particular point certainly.

Right, if I am to be subjected to these outrageous attacks all sleep is henceforth cancelled in angloland!

What? So how does that work? If the Supreme Court affirms the guilty verdict, the case can still go to another panel? Who sends it there? And if the panel decides "not guilty," does the case go back to the Supreme Court, where they can decide "guilty" again, or send it to another appeals court? Or what? How is this possible? When does the process end?

I can answer this one: nobody knows, Bob

 

[kwill]

I really like your graph. One correction please.

MK arrived home at 9:01. Time stamp says 8:51 on clock 10-12 minutes slow. So 9:01-9:04 pm.
https://www.facebook.com/1063444593...6344459390034/235387386485740/?type=3&theater

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/tBBCakw.jpg[/qimg]

Thank you. Here's the corrected image.

 

[Caper]

Can someone explain to me RS file that opened at 9:26? Is this established fact?

 

[Mary_H]

Mary H lives in Seattle . . .Question is if Amanda knows about this and if she approves? Some on this forum I think have some contact with her.
With teh way she has been hounded by the media, I would feel bad "Hey, I don't know you but. . . . ."

Having as many supporters as Amanda seemingly has, it is appalling to me that only 2,000 are willing to sign the petition.

Odds are most likely they don't know about it. . . .
If you know any major places you can post this on, I ask you do it.

Look, she is an atheist so maybe more of the atheists groups.
Look what was done by the atheist community for Tracy McBain, Rebecca Vitsmun, and Damon Fowler.
I am going to begin writing every group I know starting tomorrow.

I live in Seattle but I am not in touch with Amanda.

It's not the time yet for petitions, as no extradition request has been made, and it may be a year or more, if it ever happens. Meanwhile, I believe there are efforts being made through diplomatic channels. Amanda has a few friends who have important political connections.

Some people have suggested that a public outcry may make it more difficult for the Italians to feel they are saving face. We know how they are about digging in their heels to deny their mistakes instead of admitting them.

My humble suggestion would be for us quietly to continue to increase the groundswell of public support, as we have been doing, until it becomes common knowledge that this was the railroad job from hell. Then if there is the necessity for petitions, more people will be ready to sign.

 

[Mary_H]

Mach also said that defendants often lie in court , and are somewhat expected to do so. And it is not against the law.

Yet they can be prosecuted for calunnia. So Machiavelli punts another one.

As I understand it, what Poppy and Mach report is the case. It depends on what you're lying about. If you lie about yourself, it's okay. If you are perceived to be lying about someone else, calunnia.

 

[Vibio]

Some people have suggested that a public outcry may make it more difficult for the Italians to feel they are saving face. We know how they are about digging in their heels to deny their mistakes instead of admitting them.

Will you please explain to me this business about Italians and "saving face"? If it's a cultural observation, could you give some examples (I'm looking forward to hearing them) and how it particularly distinguishes Italian as opposed to other ethnic groups?

And as for: " We know how they are about digging in their heels to deny their mistakes instead of admitting them."

As compared to whom?