"Groundswell of public support"? I must be missing something.
Continuation Part Seven: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case
- Thread starter Kaosium
- Start date
- Status
"Groundswell of public support"? I must be missing something.
Mary_H
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 5,253
Sorry, Vibio, I am not interested in playing patty-cake with you.
Last edited:
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 4,177
It's unfortunate that Italians are being singled out this way, because the same thing happens all over the world. I could cite countless examples.
JREF2010
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,786
Its a case happening in Italy is all. Sure bad stuff happens everywhere, unfairness, and the face-saving happens in humans in general, but thats another thread isnt it?
A Judge running for office had an advertisement on the radio.
In the advertisement she said "I'm transparent and will fight for justice and not take part in the typical closed back-room politics". I thought it strange she used the word "typical " for a dishonest courtroom norm, and she said "closed back-room politics" confirming it goes on.
Basically shes saying the courtroom and Judges are liars and politicians (self motivated) and its a typical dishonest system, and shes going to be different by being transparent and honest.
RoseMontague
Published Author
Thanks for the links, Christiana. Looking into this I believe Dempsey also provided the transcript of this questioning in her book. Maybe it could be said that it was a scoop for Vogt with the audio version in the English media.
RoseMontague
Published Author
A good way to put it. Several of the pro-guilt posters are attempting just that while avoiding actual discussion of the evidence in the case. I have gotten to the point that I fell the same way. I am just not interested in wasting my time with it any longer.
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
I believe Amanda's U.S. attorney should file a brief to opporse extradition with the US Department of State and the US Department of Justice now, or immediately upon the ISC upholding the Nencini court's guilty verdict, in order to have it on record with State and Justice to be part of what State and/or Justice review if/when State receives an extradition request form Italy. Without getting their arguments into State and Justice beforehand, Knox's defense will not normally know that the State Department and the Department of Justice are processing or evaluating an extradition request, as that information is not normally public knowledge.
If Knox's defense want to have any input at the "political level", this is where it will be. Defense should file a brief to have it available to State and Justice as they evaluate an extradition request.
One item to be submitted as a supporting "statement" to State and Justice should be Knox's book. It is her writing of what occurred and it details, for example, the midnight interrogation.
State Department information on this case up to this point will be the following:
- Official communications between the two governments on Knox's arrest, detention, charges filed, etc.
- Communication between Embassy Rome's Consular Section and Knox, her family, and attorneys.
- Official correspondence and communication to/from State by members of Congress (Senator Cantwell and other Washington State representatives have expressed their concerns and this is on record).
- Embassy Rome's political reporting on this case (reporting of fissures between police and judicial players, allegations of police or judicial misconduct, media coverage, human rights issues, poor forensics, public opinion, candid comments to Embassy staff by Italian leaders and police and judicial officials).
Last edited:
Dan O.
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,594
At this point it is only an undisputed allegation.
The evidence for this claim is the copied state of the hard drive from Raffaele's MacBook Pro laptop computer which only the defence and the prosecution have. Raffaele,s defense claim in their appeal to the Massei conviction:
The only response we have is what Frank wrote in his blog:
Raffaele's defense had asked for an independent review of the computer evidence. Hellmann did not require the review to find grounds to acquit. Nencini ignored the new evidence and reconvicted.
ETA: I should note that the postal police inspection of the hard drive content using Encase forensic tools could only look at the file system timestamps: creation time, last access time, last modification time. The creation time was before the time period in question and since this file was in the peer to peer sharing folder it could be accessed from the Internet at anytime until the computer was unplugged on the 6th. The Spotlight metadata is stored in a separate database and records the last time the file was opened by the user.
Last edited:
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
Cut the crap, Vibio. You are dealing with people who seek facts, not "Foxy Knoxy" smears. Give us your timeline of the crime and be sure to include in it known and verifiable independent occurrences such as timestamped photos, phone calls, computer usage, and documented forensic test data.
Last edited:
Agreed.
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
Charlie, I agree. There are countries that lack basic forensic capabilities. Italy is not one of them.
Stefanoni's lab has the necessary equipment to do work to a certain level. Her foresic organization lacks the processes and staff to use it reliably and to protect and document their results. In other words, Stefanoni keeps a dirty lab.
If you want evidence that Italy tries to save face, you simply have to look at the Calunia law and how it is used. A defendant states in court that she was struck by police in an interrogation, and she is charged with a crime for stating that that is what the state authorities did to her. That is one way a society tries to save face.
Last edited:
Knox's defense filed a claim about police brutality? Really? If you could post a link I'd love to read it. Thanks in advance.
Mary_H
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 5,253
I think it's unfortunate you worded your post this way. Want to try again?
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
Originally Posted by Caper
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.
Posted by lionking
Anglolawyer made essentially the same point. Is he fantasising too?
I think it comes down to the following:
The US Department of State and Department of Justice will decide based on human rights and/or political interests whether the request for extradition should be submitted by the Department of Justice to a federal court. If State is not satisfied, the process stops. If State is satisfied but Justice is not satisfied, the process stops there.
If both are satisfied that extradition is warranted, a Department of Justice attorney will request a federal court (in Seattle) to issue an order for Knox's detention and extradition. The federal court will, upon determining that the proper paperwork is in order, issue an order for Knox to be taken into custody. She will be picked up and detained at a federal facility in the Seattle area.
If the above happens, Knox's attorney will file a writ of habeas corpus compelling the Department of Justice to show cause and challenging Knox's detention/extradition with the claim thaon constitution grounds.
If the federal court in Seattle hearing the case only allows review of the correctness of the legal documents, the court will approve extradition. If the court allows review of constitutional rights issues, Italy's demand for extradition will be denied becuse it can and will be shown that Knox's rights to a fair trial, unreasonable search and seizure, et al, were violated.
If the Federal District Court in Seattle rules that Knox should be extradited, Knox may appeal and drag this out for years hoping that a superior federal court will reverse the lower court's adverse decision.
Last edited:
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
Mignini filed legal charges against Knox for stating it, and against her parents for stating that Knox stated it.
Knox's attorney also stated in Nencini's court "she was hit". Judge Nencini heard it. Whether he chooses to order a judicial investigation (which is the proper course of action) or pretend he did not hear it is yet to be seen. Maybe we will be surprised.
Vibio, are you making much progress on your timeline? When do you think you will be able to post it?
A couple known time points you might want to include are the following:
According to the British girls, they servied themselves pizza between 6 and 6:30 pm.
Meredith and Sophie left the dinner/movie group at about 8:45..
Sophie and Meredith walked together until Sophie turned towards her home at about 8:55.
About one minute after Sophie and Meredith separate, Meredith (8:56) calls her mom but does not connect.
Per Sophie, when she and Meredith separated Meredith was walking in the direction of her cottage. The distance involved indicates that Meredith should have arrived at her door around 9:01 pm.
Last edited:
anglolawyer
Banned
Not much fun for her in all that but it looks right. She has to crank up an ECHR appeal in order to be able to point to that and say, 'hey, we're not done yet!'
ETA. And before that there is the Nencini motivation to rip to shreds.
Strozzi
Graduate Poster
I believe her US attorney should submit a statement (a brief) charging human rights violations and prosecutorial use of false evidence to the US Department of State right now. And amend it more and more as more information (Nencini motivation) becomes available.
Please note that Knox is in her senior year at the University of Washington and graduates June 14. Until then, her time should go to her schoolwork. Even though her mind is focused on the case.
I suspect that on June 14 when Knox walks with her classmates across the stage to receive her diploma her classmates will give her great applause or an encouraging cheer.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,561
the search function is your friend
Some of us refuted the false arguments you previously posted. Would you care respond to those?
Vibio,
Some of us refuted the false arguments you previously posted. Would you care respond to those?
Diocletus
Illuminator
- Joined
- May 19, 2011
- Messages
- 3,969
I don't think that the issues will be stated like that. I think that the fundamental argument in a habeas proceeding would be whether the US is violating her due process rights by arresting her for the purpose of extraditing her to be imprisoned abroad.
The issue to be decided will be: what is the minimum due process that someone is entitled to before they can be arrested and turned over to a foreign country. I maintain that some showing of probable cause is necessary to sustain such an arrest, and that the Bill of Rights prohibits the Senate from entering into a treaty that interferes with an individual's due process rights. Anglo thinks I'm crazy here.
At the end of the day, though, I would expect Knox to be arguing any and all of the following: 1) she is actually innocent, 2) she has been railroaded, 3) her human rights have been violated (evidence by pending ECHR appeals), 4) Italy violated its own laws and Constitution, and 5) the Italian procedure, as applied in this case, is anathema to basic concepts of fundamental fairness and justice as embodied in the US Constitution.
If the Habeas court is feeling indulgent, it will allow her to develop a record on her arguments, and that's where things might get very interesting.
Before we get to this juncture, though, I am anticipating maneuvers in both Italy and the ECtHR to block Italy from seeking extradition. Within Italy, there she might attempt to obtain relief from the Italian Constitutional Court on grounds of Constitutional/ECHR violations (e.g., convicting them on the basis of Guede's trial, which appears to be a clear violation of Italian and international law), and there is a potential political solution via the Justice Ministry. The ECtHR also offers a potential path for seeking to preempt a potential Italian extradition request.
At the end of the day, this could get very complicated indeed, notwithstanding some who wishfully and simplistically believe that it will be "game over" as soon as Italy checks a few boxes in an extradition request form.
ETA: I'm going to go on the record and say that I really resent the Senate entering into a treaty with a country that is capable of such an intentional injustice. It's like putting your kid in a car being driven by a drunk driver. Who would do that?
Last edited:
JREF2010
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,786
Putting the Prosecution/Police on trial has been the missing link all along to find the truth.
Without that you only have accusations and someone trying to prove their innocence.
From a pro-guilt point of view hwo do they see the ruined hardrives?
incompetence or conspiracy...there's only 2 answers, for several hard drives to be ruined by "experts".
And what kind of person would take the word of a bum-heroin addict and drug peddling sloth over two kids passing college level courses and a clean record?
Last time I asked that there was no response.
and the interrogation, not recorded due to budget cuts per Mignini, how do they PGP sleep with that?
Once again, this thread has become quite lengthy, so another continuation thread (Part Eight) has been started here.
Posted By: LashL
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status