Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:25 pm
It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:25 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 28 of 34 [ 8337 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 34  Next
Author Message

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:46 pm   Post subject: Re: A slow day in the grave site biz?   

Jackie wrote:
...
Initially, we see the D. denying any involvement. After a few hours of this the police stop the recording...


Couple of minutes, even.

We don't need to stop the recording, though, to get the same result.

It is the start of an unbounded mathematical series.

Iteration A:
Defendant says about the main interview, i(0), where everything cracked: I was cuffed on the back of the head; that’s why I said what I said. wa-))
Solution: set up a video recorder.


Iteration B:
Defendant says about the pre-interview interview, i(-1): I was cuffed on the back of the head; that’s why I said what I said. wa-))
Solution: set up a video recorder.


Iteration C:
Defendant says about the phone call setting up an appointment for the pre-interview interview, i(-2): I was yelled at in my ears; that’s why I said what I said. wa-))
Solution: set up a video recorder.


Iteration D:
Defendant says about the detective who walked past the pizza place while the memorial service (organised by the boss, coincidentally) was going on in the Piazza and asked for the phone number so he/she can make the phone call setting up the appointment for the pre-interview interview, i(-3): I was cuffed on the back of the head; that’s why I said what I said. wa-))
Solution: set up a video recorder.

...

Iteration X:
… i(n): Customs looked at me funny at the airport and cuffed me on the back of the head … wa-))



And so on.

Logically, this could be taken all the way back to the Big Bang.
nw)


===
And then there's Phase 2:

Iteration A:
Defendant says about the main interview, i(0), where everything cracked: it was a set-up; earlier in the pre-interview I was cuffed on the back of the head; that’s why I said what I said. wa-))
Solution: set up a video recorder for the prior step.


Repeat as above.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:04 pm   Post subject: Something for Anglo - a Tweet Course   

Quote:
When I started at the bar there was no such thing as Casebase or Austlii. We used to keep track of where cases had been considered in later decisions by gluing tiny stickers all over the pages of our CLRs [Commonwealth Law Reports]. Times certainly have changed. As I mentioned earlier, in the past 6 months the Court has even embraced social media. I would never have imagined that hundreds of paragraphs of carefully considered judicial reasoning could be cut down to 140 characters. Technology will continue to develop and its use in the courtroom will only grow.

The Hon T F Bathurst
Chief Justice of New South Wales
‘The Trials And Tribulations Of Being A Lawyer’
Newcastle University
Monday 3 March 2014
[2014] NSWJSchol 19
[link]





===
ETA

They have been busy:
[Twitter:NSWSupCt]

Tweets
Tweets & replies


NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 31

CCA finds sentence of Mr Mulligan for violent attack on pedestrian walking his dogs was manifestly inadequate. Sum: http://bit.ly/1TmPwrg

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 31
CCA dismisses sentencing appeal by Rodney Craig Grills for drug supply & possess prohibited firearm offences. Sum: http://bit.ly/1ROMOsu
NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 23

CA dismisses app re high risk violent offender supervision order; clarifies decision-making process for orders: http://bit.ly/1WJWOnW

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 23

CA dismisses appeal concerning $700,000 currency trading agreement. Summary: http://bit.ly/1UNzNS6

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 21

CA allows appeals by Bankstown Council & RMS, finding neither liable for car accident. Summary: http://bit.ly/1S2hjs7

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 20

CA dismisses appeal in costs dispute re testamentary capacity dispute. Summary: http://bit.ly/1VsU0xa

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 20

Sup Ct sentences Basanovic father & son for killing Hells Angel member & inflicting GBH on bystander. Sum: http://bit.ly/1Mwcci3

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 20

CCA allows appeal by Michelle Proud against her conviction for murder of Katherine Foreman & orders retrial. Sum: http://bit.ly/1TZSp2k

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 17

SC refers 3 offenders convicted of female genital mutilation for assessment of suitability for home detention. Sum: http://bit.ly/22qsqSV

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 15

SupCt has given judicial advice to a trustee company re distributing the estate of the late Ms Evelyn Dempsey. Sum: http://bit.ly/1LpyKGo

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 15

Sup Ct sentences Mr Xiao, a foreign national, to 8yrs 3 months imprisonment for insider trading offences. Sum: http://bit.ly/1Mlawbd
NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 13

CCA upholds conviction of Bulga Underground for breach of OH&S duty regarding employee injured in mine. Sum: http://bit.ly/22e9uXx

NSW Supreme Court ‏@NSWSupCt · Mar 10

Today, Justice Rothman gave a speech titled ‘Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions’. Read the speech here: http://bit.ly/1TyU6Ua
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 6:06 pm   Post subject: Re: UNIBAS INVITE SOLLECITO   

Catnip wrote:
Ironically, it’s the Department of Jurisprudence at the Aldo Moro University of Bari.


Interestingly,

Professor Vincenzo Bruno Muscatiello’s thesis was:
«Elemento psicologico del reato: tra dogmatica e psicologia» (1988)
“The Mental Element of an Offence: Between Dogma and Psychology”
CV is at: [uniba].


And Associate Professor Nicola Triggiani’s thesis was:
“I ‘patteggiamenti’ nel nuovo processo penale” (1990)
“‘Plea bargains’ under the new criminal law procedure”
CV is at: [uniba]


A patteggiamento, or more accurately a ‘motion for sentencing at the request of the parties’, is an agreement between accused and prosecution to the benefit of both, evaluated and authorised by the court, and available for non-serious offences, where the accused gets the advantage of: a discounted penalty (up to a maximum of one third), the exclusion of civil party action, the prosecution cannot appeal, the accused does not have to pay the State’s costs, the offence is expunged after a short period (5 years for a delict or 2 years for a contravention), the accused’s own legal costs are quite small as compared to what a full trial would entail.

Disadvantages are: the accused accepts a definitive conviction, with all that that entails, and the accused renounces, even if they are guilty, potential favourable effects arising from an ordinary trial, such as expiry under statute of limitations, Parliamentary amnesty, or de-criminalization; and also the possibility of appeals. Disadvantages of an ordinary trial are its length and expense, not to mention any benefits evaporate with a conviction.

Each case is unique.
[Link: Is it worth negotiating?]


Most online dictionaries call it a 'plea bargain', but that's not quite accurate because of its conditions and requirements. 'Settlement hearing' is better. "Motion for sentence" would probably be best.


I was thinking of Knox's invitation to Loyola University of Law as well, Catnip :)

Much reaction to the invite on Twitter and Facebook from students especially as it's another one of those 'voluntary' presentations yet they get a 0.5 credit for it, ahem eek-)
This is the same group and university that invited Mario Adinolfi, the true leader of the ultra-Catholics
Quote:
he founded a newspaper "The Cross", wants to ban the abortion pill and fights the "transsexual" propaganda. Now he talks about "women in subjection," and says they opposed the use of condoms eee-) Former MP Democratic Party is the true leader of the ultra-Catholics


And the group that invited them, Azione Universitaria? It's a fascist initiative.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jannie


Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:27 pm

Posts: 14

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

In regards to whether or not Knox was a suspect at the time of her questioning, does anyone else find it strange that the more fervent Knox supporters are arguing strongly FOR the view that Knox was in fact a suspect? (and hence should have been provided a lawyer etc etc).

I'm sure it's all been covered on here before, and I've read the excellent posts on here regarding the legal perspective and case examples comparing with Casey Anthony regarding custody, but it just struck me that from a common sense point of view, that if Knox was a suspect, doesn't this negate all the talk about how "Knox should never have been a suspect in the first place" / "no evidence" mantras that the Knox supporters like to say?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Yes, good observation.

Thinking of two items in a narrative as being connected together is sometimes a bit difficult to do in the heat of the moment, when, as the lawyers say, ‘the blood is excited’.

It’s like having a thief break into a room, ‘apparently’ go through the contents, and not steal anything. That scenario is almost as if there was no actual thief, and is already pointing to the scenario that the break-in is not real, either.

On the other hand, the deliberate avoidance of examining the coherency of things is part of potshot campaigning.

In a (US) Presidential campaign, the detracting side takes a potshot (it can be any disparaging remark) and then it’s gone. Five seconds later, another potshot. There’s no rule that says everything has to be consistent, coherent, hang together logically. The goal is to deter voters from voting or from voting for the ‘them’ side, and encourage (other) voters to vote for the ‘us’ side.

In trials, the defence, if it can introduce a reasonable doubt, wins because the prosecution has failed in its job and the defendant then goes free. There is no rule that the defence potshots have to be mutually consistent and coherent (like, if forensics failed for not following standards, then Rudy should also go free, since it was the same forensics lab).*

So there is some overlap in techniques, and the legal PR fell naturally into a Presidential campaign style. So contradictory messages are sent out.

And on the third hand, sometimes it is just plain difficult to do 2+2 and get anything out of the bottle at the same time.

I think all three hands are in play.

Plus also a fourth one, where they don’t listen to each other (or anyone else) and get tangled up in very stringy theories that go haywire. The Azecco-garbugli effect (small-town lawyer using words he does not understand).

And then (5) there’s an overlay from the Kassin-Hampikian Conglomerate Membership Club, looking for kudos and to enhance their CV and publication profile by commenting on and claiming things beyond their ken, not to mention expertise (such as it is ).

There's also a little bit of grandstanding in showing to be 'helping out' - which is a bit of shadowing of the main shadow play.

(Oh, and also Furrier-funded remote postings (through the low-income group posting farms) potshotting whatever the latest trend in the case reporting was - the pre-emptive potshots were most revealing.)




*Bongiorno's defence strategy is extremely potshotty, if I can coin a phrase. It's almost not a strategy, in a sense. Perhaps some followed her example.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 1:04 pm   Post subject: SOLLECITO AUDI A3 SEEN LEAVING COTTAGE AFTER TOW TRUCK?   

Courtesy of the Meredith Kercher Wiki.

We have the car registration docs, somewhat faded scan but apparently it was paid for by Francesco Sollecito September 24, 2007. Will post to Wiki at some point. The car docs seem to have been attachments to the prosecutor’s request to sequester the car, (which precedes the car registration docs.) We have a copy of the Prosecutor's request

The Arnone Report already deals with what perhaps may be an Audi A3 type car leaving the cottage just after the tow truck.

BTW, the reason why everyone turns to the left when walking into the garage at CCTV camera 7 is because there’s an information board with garage times, prices, schedules, dos and don'ts. Or cars following in. So it wasn't people looking towards a 'noise'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 1:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The report concludes: In risposta al quesito “…se l’autovettura (punto 3) inquadrata possa essere marca
Audi modello A3 colore scuro, stesso modello di quella in uso al Sollecito Raffaele…”, si
conclude che:
le informazioni ricavabili dalle immagini in possesso non consentono di rilevare
dettagli utili al fine di stabilire marca, modello delle autovetture oggetto di analisi

Rough translation: "if the car (point 3) framed can be brand Audi A3 Dark color model, the same model as the one used to Raffaele Sollecito ... ",
It concludes that: the information from images in possession do not allow to detect details in order to establish the brand, car models which are object of analysis."

But a dark colored car did leave the cottage after the tow truck departed.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Just a minor precision: it was late in Sept (only a few days before the murder) when the Audi 'formally' came into the possession of Papadoc - but, (as we al know) - Italian formalities were not very fast in 2007, so he maybe bought the car (cheapo) for his son in late August 2007, (certainly no earlier).

Whether this 'dark Audi A3' is important to our understanding I honestly do not know. However, it does seem that there was a "dark coloured" (unidentifiable) car hanging about.

Personally, Sollecito involving a vehicle doesn't makes sense to me. And whatever car Lombardi (the tow truck driver) described was not as recent a model as a 'compatible' Audi - but it wasn't an untrafficked road.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Why can't they feel happy?

April 4, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito: 'A future in television? Why not, but I also work as an engineer'.

Said to 'Adnkronos' Raffaele Sollecito, after participating as a commentator last Saturday in 'The yellow of the week ', the new program on Tgcom24, a spin-off of ‘Fourth Degree'.
...
[Sollecito] does not rule out a future in television, but remains down-to-earth. 'If it can be useful [utile] to me and [is] enjoyable, but at the moment there are no prospects of this kind - he concludes - I work as a software engineer'.

ADN KRONOS

March 31, 2016

Amanda Knox, on the anniversary of her acquittal, recounts her sufferings in a letter to West Seattle Herald: "I can not be happy"

DIRE DONNA

An excerpt from Knox's "letter":

Amanda Knox wrote:
Curious, that I remain so immediately sensitive to that feeling of subjugation. I had thought that, with the anniversary happening to land on Easter ..., I would feel joy, I would feel grounded in a celebratory memory. Then again, is it really a surprise that, with only a year between me and an extended period of my life when self-determination was almost utterly denied me, I find that when I check in and think about it, I’m still processing the raw facts and the raw feelings of what happened?

At the same time, this sensitivity is not a feeling I would throw away. I do hope and work to feel peace, a wearing down of that jagged edge, a healing of the wound. But I can also celebrate, if not in the sense of joy then in the sense of acknowledgement, because sensitivity informs and hones my concern with the selfhood of myself and others.


WEST SEATTLE HERALD
Top Profile 

Offline JohnQ


Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:41 am

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Read between the lines and this is a gruesome description of the murder- plus the assertion about "definitive aquital" aka "exoneration" and her usual projection she is the true victim of the murder she committed. I was about to say she acts as if Meredith never lived but she is desecrating Meredith's memory in a truly horrible and disturbing way.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:25 pm   Post subject: Suspicious Minds: Caught in a trap!   

Jannie wrote:
In regards to whether or not Knox was a suspect at the time of her questioning, does anyone else find it strange that the more fervent Knox supporters are arguing strongly FOR the view that Knox was in fact a suspect? (and hence should have been provided a lawyer etc etc).

I'm sure it's all been covered on here before, and I've read the excellent posts on here regarding the legal perspective and case examples comparing with Casey Anthony regarding custody, but it just struck me that from a common sense point of view, that if Knox was a suspect, doesn't this negate all the talk about how "Knox should never have been a suspect in the first place" / "no evidence" mantras that the Knox supporters like to say?


Per UK law (Code C, PACE Act) & the ECtHR (see, for example, Zaichenko):

1) If REASONABLE, OBJECTIVE GROUNDS to suspect/ believe it LIKELY AK COMMITTED an OFFENSE ---> warning + lawyer necessary to preserve admissibility of any subsequent lies to police

2) If NO such grounds ---> no warning or lawyer necessary to preserve admissibility of any lies to police that might pop up


Therefore, to the extent that Italian law can said to be analogous to UK/ECtHR law, the problem for Groupies who claim "there's NO evidence; never was; never will be", is they have to choose ONE of the following:

a) If NO "REASONABLE, OBJECTIVE GROUNDS" to suspect it LIKELY AK COMMITTED a CRIME ---> no duty to warn/ provide a lawyer ---> her first lies = admissible --->tend to prove GUILT; or

b) If there WERE already "REASONABLE, OBJECTIVE GROUNDS" to suspect it LIKELY AK COMMITTED a CRIME before her first lie to police ---> she should have been warned/given a lawyer BUT those "reasonable, objective grounds", in themselves, would tend to prove GUILT.


For the rare and elusive 'Intelligent Knox Booster', it's a bit like 'Sophie's Choice': they have to decide which piece of FOA BS to drop (the 'no evidence!' bit, or 'her first lies should be inadmissible!' bit) but, either way, they lose. Only a handful of them are wise enough to avoid claiming 'there were never any objective grounds upon which to suspect it likely she was guilty' when making the tiresome 'she should have been given a lawyer before her first lie' argument.

Face it, Love Swains: the cops didn't have any "REASONABLE, OBJECTIVE GROUNDS" to suspect it LIKELY she COMMITTED a CRIME until she first accused PL and admitted to being present during the murder. So those first lies are on her ... unless the cops beat her into it - and won't it be interesting to see whether the ECtHR buys that story because it seems NONE of the Italian courts did.

Here's hoping we all live long enough to see how it plays out in the ECtHR.



PS Apart from Mach & Vixen, is there ANYONE, anyone at all, now posting on ISF who has NOT literally pressed flesh with Amanda Knox or, like LooneyJ, personally offered to fetch her coffee ( wan-)) ???

Image

No emotional bias there :roll:


---------------------------------------------

ETA I've already got my ISF reply and, sadly, it seems I've been giving LJ too much credit all these years - I guess his thumbs weren't the only reasons he couldn't deal with the LSAT ;-)

It would be better, I suppose, if I could put this to them with CRAYONS somehow ... but here goes nothing:

1) Note my repeated use of the phrase "TEND to prove guilt" - to wit, I am NOT asserting that the "reasonable, objective grounds" for "suspicion" will necessarily prove sufficient to establish guilt BARD when tested in a court of law (that is a different question), nor am I suggesting that cops are somehow expected to be able to foresee whether this will be the case (they're only human!), I am simply pointing out that, to the extent that there exist grounds for suspicion which are, in fact, "reasonable" and "objective" (i.e., "based on known facts or information which are relevant to the LIKELIHOOD the offence has been committed" by D), they will TEND to prove D's guilt; &

2) To my honest surprise, LJ, one of the more dedicated Google U Grads, seems absolutely incapable of understanding the SIMPLE idea that an OBJECTIVE legal test is performed by a court, ex post, such that it does not matter whether the cops in question were, at the time in question, smart or not/ suspicious or not /reasonable or not - the court simply notes what the cops knew, and when they knew it, and asks: Would a REASONABLE person with that same information, at that same point in time, suspect it likely D committed a crime?

If the answer is yes, the cops in question will be taken by the court as having R, O grounds to suspect it likely D committed a crime (and, therefore, under a duty to warn D to preserve the admissibility of any subsequent incriminating statements by D) REGARDLESS of whether those cops actually suspected D.

If the answer is no, the cops in question will NOT be taken as having R, O grounds to suspect D (and, therefore, under NO duty to warn D in order to preserve the admissibility of any incriminating statements offered by D) REGARDLESS of whether those cops actually suspected D.

So, ONE MORE TIME, "Love Swains" (lovely Cape still holds the copyright on that one):

Before AK made her FIRST accusation of PL/ admission to being present, what "reasonable, objective grounds" ("based on known facts or information which are relevant to the LIKELIHOOD the offence [was] ... committed [by AK]" ) did the cops have upon which to suspect it LIKELY that knox had a hand in the rape, beating and butchering of young Meredith ????????????????????????????????????

(If you can't answer this Q, you can't argue AK was entitled to a warning and a lawyer BEFORE her FIRST accusation/ admission.)
Top Profile 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Well, I don't think LJ is quite right about the comparative case of Christopher Jefferies. For one thing, Bristol police didn't arrest Chris because of the killer Vincent Tabak's false claim that Chris's car was moved on the night of the murder. Tabak did call police from Holland and spin them that story, but only after he saw media reports of Chris's arrest. The police actually made the arrest, as far as I could tell, because of a passing remark of Chris's to a TV reporter which amounted to 'changing his story'.

It seems that Chris had mentioned a possible sighting of his tenant Joanna Yeates, the victim, outside the house that evening, considerably later than the last sighting he had given to detectives. I suppose if he really thought it was worth mentioning he should have said it before, but the reason he didn't was that he wasn't at all sure it was Jo. And he was right, it wasn't. She was already dead by then. So, if the killer had quickly made sure he was seen by witnesses somewhere else, that sighting could have given him a false alibi.

I still don't think the police really had to go banco at that point. (The man they were looking for was surely going to be an active heterosexual of military age, not a confirmed bachelor in respectable retirement.) But they were feeling the media pressure -- the thing that Bruno blames the Perugian investigators for.

Secondly, I doubt that, under Italian rules, the police could have arrested Chris and given him suspect status at that point. If they did, they couldn't question him unless he agreed, and he could end the interview when he wanted, as Knox did in her December interview with Mignini. (It seems the prosecutor normally conducts suspect interviews.) They would need rather more before they proceeded to the arrest, which is almost equivalent to bringing charges in England, and in Knox's case they really didn't have enough until Knox placed herself at the scene of the crime, at which point questioning was correctly suspended. So, not at all the same as Chris's case, really.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jannie wrote:
In regards to whether or not Knox was a suspect at the time of her questioning, does anyone else find it strange that the more fervent Knox supporters are arguing strongly FOR the view that Knox was in fact a suspect? (and hence should have been provided a lawyer etc etc).

I'm sure it's all been covered on here before, and I've read the excellent posts on here regarding the legal perspective and case examples comparing with Casey Anthony regarding custody, but it just struck me that from a common sense point of view, that if Knox was a suspect, doesn't this negate all the talk about how "Knox should never have been a suspect in the first place" / "no evidence" mantras that the Knox supporters like to say?


Welcomes. Well we dont look for logic & correct facts "over there"!!

But the cops played very fair. Even after she WAS provisionally charged by Mignini early on 6 Nov 2007 she was simply suspected of being present (which she admitted over and over that night) and of holding something back. Both after the "confession" at the Ficcara session - not even an interview let alone an interrogation - and at the Mignini session she was told to get a lawyer, and shrugged and pressed on.

When she DID have lawyers they gave her publicly less than 100% support, told her to stop lying, one resigned. She said in various places in the book "if only I could make my own case..." like she was held back. So on 17 Dec 2007 with Mignini she DID make her own case and in July 2008 on the stand - and in both cases dug herself deep.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

guermantes wrote:
Why can't they feel happy?

April 4, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito: 'A future in television? Why not, but I also work as an engineer'.

Said to 'Adnkronos' Raffaele Sollecito, after participating as a commentator last Saturday in 'The yellow of the week ', the new program on Tgcom24, a spin-off of ‘Fourth Degree'.
...
[Sollecito] does not rule out a future in television, but remains down-to-earth. 'If it can be useful [utile] to me and [is] enjoyable, but at the moment there are no prospects of this kind - he concludes - I work as a software engineer'.

ADN KRONOS

March 31, 2016

Amanda Knox, on the anniversary of her acquittal, recounts her sufferings in a letter to West Seattle Herald: "I can not be happy"

DIRE DONNA

An excerpt from Knox's "letter":

Amanda Knox wrote:
Curious, that I remain so immediately sensitive to that feeling of subjugation. I had thought that, with the anniversary happening to land on Easter ..., I would feel joy, I would feel grounded in a celebratory memory. Then again, is it really a surprise that, with only a year between me and an extended period of my life when self-determination was almost utterly denied me, I find that when I check in and think about it, I’m still processing the raw facts and the raw feelings of what happened?

At the same time, this sensitivity is not a feeling I would throw away. I do hope and work to feel peace, a wearing down of that jagged edge, a healing of the wound. But I can also celebrate, if not in the sense of joy then in the sense of acknowledgement, because sensitivity informs and hones my concern with the selfhood of myself and others.


WEST SEATTLE HERALD


West Seattle Herald are removing any dissenting comments and blocking the posters. I posted this and it was removed.

Quote:
There was more than enough evidence to convict you, Ms Knox. You were actually convicted at your first instance trial & second level appeal on more evidence than was used to convict Scott Peterson, and on more DNA evidence than Rudy Guede.

The Supreme court of Italy says in their report that you were most definitely there when Meredith was murdered and that there's strong suspicion that Sollecito was also. It states that even had you had have washed Ms Kercher's blood from your hands, it still wouldn't be sufficient proof to convict you.
The court did not find you innocent, it found you not guilty due to insufficient evidence, just like OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony, who nobody refers to as exonerated.
The court also finalized your calunnia conviction, for falsely accusing your employer of rape and murder and leaving him in prison for two weeks, despite telling your mother in a recorded prison conversation that you knew he had nothing to do with Meredith's murder.

The West Seattle Herald states it encourages its readers to comment. Do they encourage them to ask hard questions and make factual observations too? Such as Ms Knox allowing attacks on Meredith Kercher and her family, on her own blog, which she moderates ergo approves? Or her following the worst of these attackers on twitter? Or her remaining a convicted criminal, due to her calunnia conviction being finalized?

There is a wealth of translated court documentation available on Meredith Kercher's case. Anyone who wishes to know the facts of her case, simply need to read the judges sentencing and motivational reports.

Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito are extremely lucky to be at liberty. Hopefully neither of them will get themselves in trouble again.

RIP Meredith Kercher, the real victim here and condolences to her stoic and dignified family.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 1:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Oh dear, the computer engineer who hasn't finished his website yet, is now losing the race for "most distasteful and unacceptable TV guest/host ever".

Porta a Porta, which is a RAI (State broadcaster) program has scheduled an appearance by the son of Toto Riina, a notorious and hated mafia capo, promoting a book written by this son.

Some rather well known names have become justifiably very agitated:

"Rosy Bindi, commissione Antimafia, ha detto: "si presta ad essere il salotto del negazionismo della mafia". "It (the programme) is becoming the salon of mafia deniers".

"Mentre il presidente del Senato Pietro Grasso twitta: "Non mi interessa se le mani di Riina accarezzavano i figli, sono le stesse macchiate di sangue innocente". (I'm not interested that Riina's hands cuddled his children, they are covered in the blood of innocents.)

"Pier Luigi Bersani invece ha deciso di rinunciare ad essere ospite di 'Porta a Porta'." (Bersani PD, ex-pm has refused to appear on the show.)

http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2016/ ... 137025108/

I haven't seen the International Press picking up on this story (although there has already been plenty of interest in 'Sollecito as TV criminologist'). I expect they'll pick up the Salvo Riina story too, and connect them (and bash Italian media ... which it probably deserves).
Top Profile 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 3:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Both his sons are crims themselves with one serving life for murder and the other getting 14 years in 2002
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 4:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

For those who haven't seen it yet, the finale of Run for his life-The People vs. OJ Simpson was gripping. A must see.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:54 pm   Post subject: Re: e44: a prince among pinheads, pigs, pervs & PR pimps?   

hugo wrote:
Jackie wrote:

It's truly a shame that e44 doesn't want to delve into the Supreme Court's REMARKABLE decision because I have seen no reason to doubt his claims (Harvard Law + 3 decades of experience as a litigator with a big firm).

I honestly believe that once upon a time he was a brilliant legal scholar, up to his eyeballs in cases, arguing whether this case or that was rightly decided, so I think it's sad he's now slumming on a furrier's website with 20 or so idiotic and/or pathological lay people whose idea of intelligent legal debate amounts to "STUFF IT UP YOUR A** AND F*** THE HELL OFF":



Never worked crime, though. He knows even less about crime than Clive does. And he's an old, retired, privileged white guy (I think conveniently a bit too old and privileged to get called up for Vietnam, so he never had to spend time in the army with all those... black guys) and he's just not going to accept that a nice white middle-class 'co-ed' could commit a terrible crime when there's a black guy to pin it on. And practically every factual comment I have seen him make on Meredith's case has been wrong by about 180 degrees. Wrong to the point that there's obviously a mental block of a quasi-religious kind that prevents him from seeing what's what.

The ISF conversation has been quite interesting lately, filling us in on the supporters' party that Clive flew 6,000 miles to attend. Knox showed up briefly and did a Skype with Sollecito for the groupies' delectation and then pushed off at the earliest opportunity.


I have to disagree with you there, Hugo - I don't think this "Clive" character is fit to carry e44's briefcase.

In fact, I'll bet my life that e44 has casually forgotten more about the law than "Clive" ever knew.

I've never seen e44 post anything that would make me doubt his claims to be a very well-educated and experienced lawyer, nor have I seen him post anything that isn't at least superficially rational.

I simply can't dismiss him as a dunce or a loon.

That's not to say I don't see flaws in his approach - for example, he prefers to stay at the 35,000 ft level/ doesn't delve into the details about the DNA evidence and how it should be evaluated in context (tertiary transfer of touch DNA is a low probability event even under ideal conditions!), ignores the shortcomings of C & V (NO experience doing technical searches of crime scenes), ignores the concessions of C & V on the stand (no contamination in the lab, MK's full profile on the blade, RS's full profile on the clasp) along with their erroneous assertions about BARD ("anything is possible" is NOT a RD!), seems rather naive about the motivations of "experts" commenting in the media rather than in the courtroom/ seems to have forgotten the rationale for restricting lawyers from trying cases on the courthouse steps, has a conception of the BARD standard that's akin to 'absolute' certainty ('would you want anything less when giving medical treatment to your ailing child?!'), etc..

I wish he were willing to discuss his position further and answer some of my questions (especially about the INCREDIBLY CURIOUS judgment handed down by Supreme Court), but he seems to have lost interest in analyzing the case (or perhaps cannot stand to acknowledge what the Court has actually written about the defendants).

In any event, I intend to make a few comments this spring/summer about his position (which, IMHO, is worth some careful consideration), unless the wind is just right for sailing (the only way to cure my sadness over the departure of "my" lovely Vantage GT).


Not just another pretty face:
Hidden Content: show
Image
Airport Goodbyes ...
"'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all." ~ A, LT

PS This BEAST has absolutely DESTROYED my former zeal for 911s - a flat-6 will just never sound as AWESOME as that AM!!!
:twisted:


_____________________________________________________________
ETA:

As for ISF, it really has been interesting to behold the little 'reveals' over the years - Halkides not immediately disclosing his connection to the defense, Lovering's using JREF as a testing ground for crafting spin around cherries picked (ever so carefully) from the case file, the little meet-and-greets with the defendants, etc..

I'm left to wonder whether ANY of the 15 or so regulars still posting at ISF/IA have not yet hugged Knox in person! (Nothing but neutral, unemotional, "trained rational thinkers" there! :roll: ) I, too, am left with the impression that K & S are not exactly seeking to spend a lot of un-televised time with their 15 or so diehard internet fans: 'Thanks so much, Guys! Gotta run to a wedding! My Mom will keep you company though! Buh-bye!' LOL

BTW, what happened to the "36" year old "hockey-playing", "skeptic", "Christian" liar??? Someone should check the basement. He hasn't missed 2 days of posting in years (except, of course, for that little spell when the translation of Nencini's judgement was first published revealing "Billy" to be a bald- faced LIAR).


Last edited by Jackie on Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:16 pm, edited 11 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

What do you sail, Jackie?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 10:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
What do you sail, Jackie?

Hi, E - I'm just a keel-crunching beginner - my Dad is teaching me to sail on his boat (there will be no sailboats, and no AMs, for me until I pay off my (and my wife's) massive student loans! LOL):
Image


__________________________

PS It's too bad "Billy" has gone AWOL - I want to see him try to hand-wave away further confirmation (as if any were needed) that not everyone in the English-speakng world is as convinced as "Billy" is about this idea of "obvious innocence".

News of RS's job as a "Murder Expert" (as FOX puts it), is receiving some very negative reaction in the UK* - check out the top comments in the Daily Mail:

Image


Same sort of sentiment in the USA (FOX):

Image

What say you now, "Billy"???

Is it that the UK and the US need to import more screech from Newfoundland?!

But, heck, maybe Italy is onto something here: If Nancy Grace or Dateline hired OJ and Casey Anthony to discuss the case against Jodi Arias or Robert Durst, I couldn't help but take a peak just to look for 'tells' - and, I suppose, that's the point.

The question for me is this: Is this just an innocent but unlucky guy making lemonade out of lemons, or is this Joran van der Sloot all over again?


*Note how the only support is coming from the ubiquitous (Steve Moore-loving) "hikertom" in Cali (of course!) and he hasn't even bothered to read the Supreme Court's judgment (he still thinks RG "acted alone").
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Lots of criticism of TgCom24's choice of Sollecito as a regular commentator on TV:

April 6, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito — the sum (epitome) of incompetence of TV commentator
By Giorgio Simonelli

Image

On the idea to enlist in the new TgCom24 programme The Mystery of the Week Raffaele Sollecito as a commentator and expert has already commented widely and promptly Selvaggia Lucarelli, identifying all of the absurdity of the event. But the choice, beyond the issues of opportunity and good taste, also helps address the problem from a broader perspective

Then, on a deeper and more general level, there is another problem that the presence of Sollecito raises. The problem is that of so-called commentators or experts involved in televised debates. What is it that legitimizes this role? What skills? What experiences? What knowledge? It is evident that in recent years we have seen on TV in all colors: psychologists who made the diagnosis without ever having met the subject they were talking about, lawyers who expressed themselves on cases of which they could not have read the papers, ambitious young social climbers in a political arena who reconstructed the history of our country without even a smattering of understanding that allows you to pass a Baccalaureate (maturity) exam (l’esame di maturità). Let's say Sollecito is able to sum up in himself (is an embodiment of) all this incompetence, uneasy feelings, ignorance.

He does not have any basic knowledge of the law, having a degree in engineering; nor had he had an opportunity or intention to study carefully the cases which he is called to comment on. But - says the Director of TgCom 24 – he had lived on his skin a deep experience of the Italian justice of which he can evaluate the mechanisms. That would be like saying that a person, who to his misfortune has long been hospitalized for cardiac problems, leaves the hospital cured and starts to give views on diagnosis and treatment decided by doctors for other patients. Or that someone, who has been involved in a serious car accident, becomes an expert in the construction techniques of cars and provides advice to automakers.

In short, although there is not much reason for optimism – there is no end to TV at its worst - I would like to hope that the madness of this extreme choice will serve to reopen the discussion on the role of expert-commentator. It would be the only merit that, for once, would be attributable to Sollecito.


IL FATTO QUOTIDIANO

April 5, 2016

Next stop - knife sharpener?
By Selvaggia Lucarelli

[...]Sollecito commentator on TV in a broadcast on murder victims, in the history of all the April Fools jokes from the Cretaceous to the present, is not, alas, a false story mistaken for true, but the first real news mistaken for false. I wonder now what will be his next step in the world of work: maybe it would be a nice idea to open a guest house for students. Or become a sharpener of knives. Or open a real estate agency in Perugia. What is certain is that in the wake of this macabre narcissism anything is possible (to be expected).[...]


IL FATTO QUOTIDIANO
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sollecito has no scruples to continue in his new role as a TV commentator and defends himself. There is something pathological in his love for being in the media spotlight.

April 6, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito, work on TV causes controversy: his defense
By Anna Montesano

...
Raffaele would become so to all intents, a new commentator, who has nevertheless caused much controversy to which the 32-year-old decided to respond: "On TV there are many criminology experts who speak after studying from books. I lived through four years in prison, a judicial process and a trial by media. I think my opinion is worth no less."

Raffaele Sollecito defends himself: "My testimony can be of help to many"

There is no contract to formalize this new role of Raffaele Sollecito, but the young man is ready to clarify in an interview with Vanity Fair the importance of his figure in this project: "My testimony can be helpful to many. I fight because nobody can relive what happened to me. I can bring to legal debates an original point of view – specifically – that of the accused. That of a man who, unfortunately, has known in detail the courts, the media and prisons."

Raffaele Sollecito and his new role on TV: "I will focus on the Italian judicial cases"

Raffaele Sollecito motivates thus the importance of his presence in the new TgCom24 program, finally explaining on what he will focus in the commentator position: "I will focus on the Italian court cases, taking into account only the facts and factual issues of the investigation".


GOSSIP E TV
Top Profile 

Offline JohnQ


Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:41 am

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 6:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
For those who haven't seen it yet, the finale of Run for his life-The People vs. OJ Simpson was gripping. A must see.


What did you like about it?

I'm old enough to remember the actual event. Not fun.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:56 am   Post subject: Re: e44: a prince among pinheads, pigs, pervs & PR pimps?   

Jackie wrote:

In fact, I'll bet my life that e44 has casually forgotten more about the law than "Clive" ever knew.


The trouble is, though... Clive is one of the people he relies on for information and opinion-cues. You see how this could be a problem. He must have forgotten a fair bit since Harvard Law School if he thinks that, in making public commentary on a murder case, not only on message boards but on a blog, and claiming considerable legal credentials, it is quite all right to rely wholly and unquestioningly on arguments made by a defendant, the defendant's family and friends and the defendant's various advocates, however wonky. To do that is to exhibit a complacent prejudice which is pretty regrettable. And, despite being a legal observer, he doesn't seem at all interested in what the Supreme Court actually has to say.

Quote:
...seems rather naive about the motivations of "experts" commenting in the media rather than in the courtroom/ seems to have forgotten the rationale for restricting lawyers from trying cases on the courthouse steps, has a conception of the BARD standard that's akin to 'absolute' certainty ('would you want anything less when giving medical treatment to your ailing child?!'), etc..


Quite. I think it's just as well he never became a judge.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

JohnQ wrote:
Ergon wrote:
For those who haven't seen it yet, the finale of Run for his life-The People vs. OJ Simpson was gripping. A must see.


What did you like about it?

I'm old enough to remember the actual event. Not fun.


I liked the many similarities between OJ Simpson and the Trial In Italy :) and found it educational, but also, just great TV. I love acting, and good actors. Appreciate the craft, and especially, good writing.

Sarah Paulson who played Marcia Clark was just great and deserves an Emmy. Courtney B. Vance for Johnny Cochran, awesome. David Schwimmer as Robert Kardashian? In a recent Slate review he was called the moral heart of the show, as you see him start to doubt his friend's innocence through the reactions in his eyes . In real life Kardashian expressed doubt in Simpson's innocence and they never spoke to each other after.

I lived in LA just after the riots and left just before the murder; followed the trial in its entirety as I traveled through the states. My home was equidistant from Nicole Brown and OJ Simpson's, so I knew the neighbourhoods well. Had some doubts how one person could have committed the crime and, the time frame between TOD and his sighting by the limo driver seemed a bit tight but not, impossible.

Personally, I think he was guilty of murder, and that it was pre meditated. I also understood the jury's reasonable doubts in this interview OJ juror Sheila Woods

It ended on the acquittal. I hope the civil trial gets covered in another season.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

And apropos of nothing :) https://www.instagram.com/p/BD6rdkfiaHM/
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:


Ha ha. Ha ha ha! I didnt get the joke till I realised it is a video. I thought the banana was the whole joke.

Who is that? A fan true to form!!!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Never knew her till now, Pete, but this is her: Melissa Stetten

Yes, a very funny video :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2016 7:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Today the 'motivations' explaining the finding of Knox not guilty in the case of callunnia against various police officers and the interpreter were published. (The verdict, from Florence, was handed down a couple of months back)

Here's what seems to me to be a decent precis of the motivation report. It's got some nice circular reasoning in it, when it uses the later garbled 'memoriales' to substantiate the conclusion that she was off her trolley when she first named Patrick, and that being off her trolley (due to exhaustion and over-interrogation) excuses her from everything.

They don't seem to have considered that she shouldn't have been there on the evening of Nov 5, and that nobody had required her to forgo any beauty sleep and r&r time. Silly really, they truly drank the Kool Aid.

http://www.nuovocorrierenazionale.it/am ... pressioni/

The writer is one of the Fioruccis, (from Perugia I think), who have followed the case from day one.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 12:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thanks Sallyoo. There is no doubt in my mind that the next case and every other case that has to do with this case will be white washed as well. This explanation doesn't seem to be in line with the conviction she got. She was so tired after an hour of questioning..yeah right. She wouldn't have been going to school and going out with her bf if she was so tired. She would be in bed!
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 1:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

[Umbria Domani] and [la Nazione] also carry the story.

- - - - -

Amanda named Patrick Lumumba because “in ‘offering up’ that name to those who were interrogating her so forcibly she was hoping to put an end to that pressure”.

The Seattle student’s words* were “the confused narration of a dream, albeit rather macabre” and “not the description of something that had really occurred”.
(*Alternatively, la Nazione says: For the Court, the account contained in her statement [to police] and in her note written immediately after appears to be «the confused narration of a dream, albeit rather macabre, rather than the description of something that had really occurred». For the Court, this «confirms the state in which Amanda found herself» at that moment and rules out that her aim «could have been to keep quiet about the name of the actual author of the deed».)


“numerous procedural irregularities” and “the obsessive duration of the investigators”

Amanda’s declarations “were clearly characterised by a psychological condition which became” for her “a truly unsupportable weight”. And therefore “understandable” that “succumbing to the pressure and tiredness she had hoped to put an end to that situation, giving those who were interrogating her what they at base wanted to hear – a name, a killer”.


= = =
Except Amanda herself said she truly believed at the time that she named him that Patrick was the killer.

Also, as to the written note, ‘immediately after’ actually means “after a period of sleeping”, that is, no tiredness and no pressure.

The provision of a name may indicate an intention not to hide the killer’s name, but it may also indicate the opposite, an intention to hide the killer’s name. And in any case, why place herself at the scene? Is there some confused recollection, rather than dreaming, going on?

Why ‘confused narration’ is assigned to a dream-state, rather than to a drugged-state or mentally-impaired state or combination, is not explained in the news reports.

Also, the confusion is not in the narration (Patrick did it!) so much as in the afterwards-claimed state of mind of the narrator in making that accusation (and placing herself at the scene covering her ears).
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sollecito at the University of Bari.

I don't know who would want to listen to him repeating the same tired mantra again and again to different audiences. He doesn't even bother to add some more variety and depth to his speeches.

April 7, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito at UniBa: my tragedy lasted 8 years (PHOTOS)
By Pierpaolo de Natale

Great success for the event held at the University of Bari and organized by students from Azione Universitaria (University Action). In a packed classroom VII of the Department of Law was held a meeting The Meredith case and the media trial. The event was attended by Prof. Nicola Triggiani (Professor of Criminal Procedural Law), Dr. Massimiliano Scagliarini (journalist of Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno) and Raffaele Sollecito, the most anticipated guest, as a result of direct involvement in the court case that has divided Italy.

At the center of the debate, there was a big argument. It has been asked whether it is possible that a person may suffer a condemnation in the media even before being found guilty in the course of a trial. In an attempt to find an answer to this question, the discussion was opened by Prof. Triggiani, who illustrated the relationship between the judicial process and the trial by media, highlighting the macroscopic differences that are less obvious, but - as reported - much more important.

The professor's speech was followed by a telephone connection with Paolo Liguori, Director of TGCOM24, recently in the spotlight for inviting Sollecito to comment on facts of crime and judicial record in the studio of his television show. Soon after, it was the turn of Scagliarini, who put under the magnifying glass numerous newspaper excerpts, showing the crucial role of news in the legal field.

Finally, while the audience (overwhelmingly composed of students) in the classroom fell silent, Raffaele Sollecito took the floor. Literally surrounded by the press, Sollecito told about his own experience, trying to make everyone understand the clear distinction between media and reality. "I remember very well the first few days of the investigation. The body of a British student, Meredith Kercher, was found, and it was me and Amanda Knox who were closest to the crime scene. This proximity led the investigation in one direction, making investigators forget that the bloody hand print found next to the victim bore the signature of Rudy Guede. Nobody had the desire to wait for the results of forensic analysis and everyone pointed the finger at us, who were the closest to the crime scene." Raffaele Sollecito explained thus to those present the beginning of his judicial ordeal.

"This was quickly followed by a press conference just a few days after the start of the investigation, at which it was said, 'we are the culprits, namely, Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Patrick Lumumba'. Three people absolutely innocent, that had nothing to do with the murder and were not present at the crime scene. Since then, there have been a series of flip-flopping and subterfuge; I've lived through 8 years of legal proceedings, 5 trials, 6 months in solitary confinement, 3 and a half years in a maximum security prison."

"The media - continues Sollecito - when nobody knew me, picked on me, discrediting me as a cold person and de-contextualizing a number of facts. I suffered blackouts (fainting spells) and panic attacks. I had thyroid problems that I still have today: all caused by constantly seeing myself at the center of televised debates. All this - in addition to broadcasts, where they talked about trivial things, from the shirt color to [exchanging] glances with Amanda. This attitude has stirred up all discontent against my person, constructing a character that does not exist and all based on zero information; my personality was completely disconnected from reality. People don't know anything about the legal process and many do not even know why I have been acquitted. This is because, usually, reporters tell the facts that create sensationalism and emotion, but without analyzing the reality of the trial and the investigation. […] Circumstances that have exceeded your wildest imaginations, provoking a series of misunderstandings that resulted in a tragedy that lasted 8 years. Although the evidence that led to my acquittal was already known to many after the first six months of investigation.


IL GIORNALE DI PUGLIA
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Short video of Sollecito's visit to the University of Bari (Sollecito Sr. and Mara sitting in the front row of the audience.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Raffaele Sollecito participated in a conference at the University of Bari entitled "The Meredith case and the trial by media".
Next appointment? On TV, where he will be a commentator for a crime program.

LA7 VIDEO
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

What's the point of courts writing reasons for judgments when it's the media version that is spread about the news?
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The concept of "judicial truth" means that someone can be considered guilty or innocent by the public irrespective of the formal legal outcome.

The corresponding concept of "media truth" means that the legal discussion is spun on the foundations provided in the media, and restricted to the media's narrative boundaries, and so becomes a 'parallel universe' (or virtual reality, if you will).

And then there are the courts that get their interpretation methods from the media stream, and we end up with "judicial/media truth". (When the defence submission is the press release ...)
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 4:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

There's something about the Mad Hatter's Tea Party in all of this:

If I’m dreaming, and I accuse my boss of being the murderer, that’s not calunnia because:
  • being in a dream-state, I don’t actually know that he didn’t do it (calunnia offence requires that I know the person didn’t do it)
  • or: being in a dream-state negates the accusatory nature of the accusation, in effect annulling it



If I write the same thing down in a note after waking up from a 3-hour nap, that’s also not calunnia because:
  • the note is part of the same dream
  • or: the words in the note come from the dream, so standing by the note and the dream-words makes the dream continue (in extended mode)


IF I go to court and testify that the police cuffed me on the head, that is not calunnia because: I was dreaming and therefore confused when I testified; or, I was dreaming when I was cuffed on the head (or better: I was dreaming that I was cuffed on the head), so therefore saying so is merely a reporting of dream events, so therefore not actionable.

Conclusion: dreams are not evidence.


Practical result:
If someone comes to the police station and makes a false accusation about someone else, it is not a false accusation because:
  • the first someone might be dreaming
  • the first someone might be giving the appearance of someone who is awake, but they are actually sleep-walking

Similarly, if someone testifies in court.




Consequences for law students:

Court judgments whose reasons are written in a confused state and way are the result of a dream.

Court judgements written in a dream-state are null and void, just like calunnias made while in a dream-state are not calunnias.

Court judgements written under the pressure of the media spotlight are not independent, and are also null and void.

Court judgements written in a dream-like way under the pressure of the media spotlight are twice as null and void.

A court judgment is the result of a dream if it is written in a confused state and way.

Copyright fees do not accrue morally to Lewis Carroll in any of this.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:22 pm   Post subject: THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS   

Catnip, yes, Lewis Carroll: Opium as a Possible Influence upon the Alice Books,
the defendants certainly were under the influence of drugs, and,
some of the judges reports read like they were under the influence, :) but,
Knox's constant state of mind as evidenced in her writing, memoriales, H.O.T. video?
Quote:
The widespread use of opium during the Victorian period may have influenced or been reflected in Alice's Adventures In Wonderland. Mind altering experiences resulting from narcotics relate nicely to some of the detailed descriptions in the Alice books, such as the growing and shrinking and the image of the caterpillar smoking the hookah.

The complex dream atmosphere which Alice lives through can easily be compared to a mind-altering drug experience. The idea of eating a mushroom or drinking from a bottle that causes one to feel altered in some way parallels drug experience as well. In Carroll's time five out of six families used opium habitually (Wohl 34-35) Infant mortality was an extremely common result of use of the narcotic. It was said that infants "shrank up into little old men" when they became sick (Wohl 34-35).

Ahem.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The Knox calunnia sentencing report...

Catnip wrote:
[Umbria Domani] and [la Nazione] also carry the story.

- - - - -

Amanda named Patrick Lumumba because “in ‘offering up’ that name to those who were interrogating her so forcibly she was hoping to put an end to that pressure”.

The Seattle student’s words* were “the confused narration of a dream, albeit rather macabre” and “not the description of something that had really occurred”.
(*Alternatively, la Nazione says: For the Court, the account contained in her statement [to police] and in her note written immediately after appears to be «the confused narration of a dream, albeit rather macabre, rather than the description of something that had really occurred». For the Court, this «confirms the state in which Amanda found herself» at that moment and rules out that her aim «could have been to keep quiet about the name of the actual author of the deed».)


“numerous procedural irregularities” and “the obsessive duration of the investigators”

Amanda’s declarations “were clearly characterised by a psychological condition which became” for her “a truly unsupportable weight”. And therefore “understandable” that “succumbing to the pressure and tiredness she had hoped to put an end to that situation, giving those who were interrogating her what they at base wanted to hear – a name, a killer”.


= = =
Except Amanda herself said she truly believed at the time that she named him that Patrick was the killer.

Also, as to the written note, ‘immediately after’ actually means “after a period of sleeping”, that is, no tiredness and no pressure.

The provision of a name may indicate an intention not to hide the killer’s name, but it may also indicate the opposite, an intention to hide the killer’s name. And in any case, why place herself at the scene? Is there some confused recollection, rather than dreaming, going on?

Why ‘confused narration’ is assigned to a dream-state, rather than to a drugged-state or mentally-impaired state or combination, is not explained in the news reports.

Also, the confusion is not in the narration (Patrick did it!) so much as in the afterwards-claimed state of mind of the narrator in making that accusation (and placing herself at the scene covering her ears).


Thanks a lot Sallyoo and Catnip for this. Sallyoo also kindly posted on TJMK and my own first comment was thus:

Quote:

Reads like Marasca/Bruno Part Deux just when Marasca/Bruno Part Un has become such a ridiculed bit of work (we had 3 series taking it apart, and theres another in the works) with of course Guede’s help.

That daffy “interrogation” narrative is straight from the RS/AK defense and even Hellmann did not buy that Knox was forced to finger Patrick.

Did the judge here not read ANY trial transcripts? There certainly was no “interrogation” and we showed in our long series how court documents proved that at great length.

Our own problem is we showed it in English and so mainly to Brits and Americans.

There is no PMF or Wiki or TJMK equivalent in Italian, I guess nobody saw the need, after Knox was on the stand mid 2009 guilt was so obvious to all there.

So we have a very assymetric situation: (1) more cynicism and anger among the population in Italy, (2) far more cold hard facts laid out in the Us and UK.

This outcome could certainly be appealed. Dr Mignini won both his own appeals against a rogue Florence prosecutor and judge.

However by far the bigger deal, I reckon, is the RS and AK books.

They are both in Italian, and cases against RS and against Oggi as a proxy for AK proceed now, with the Oggi verdict later this month. Chimera has just listed 100 defamations and Hopeful above looks deeper into what was behind some.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:22 pm   Post subject: "Hardly Credible"   

guermantes wrote:
Sollecito at the University of Bari.
...

April 7, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito at UniBa: my tragedy lasted 8 years (PHOTOS)
By Pierpaolo de Natale

" ...

I remember very well the first few days of the investigation... "





When he didn't even know what day of the week it was?!

Or whether his first-ever sex partner left his pad the previous evening (only DAY 5 of their affair)?!

Or whether Filomena's door was open or closed when Knox brought him back to the cottage?!

Or whether he'd cooked for and accidentally cut Meredith?!


LOL

No wonder the Supreme Court finds him "hardly credible"* and notes that "strong suspicions" remain*.

Bongiorno did well to keep her lying, memory-impaired, Vaseline-joking, knife-loving client off the stand.

Are ANY of those Bari law professors and students bothering to actually READ the court documents???


guermantes wrote:
Short video of Sollecito's visit to the University of Bari (Sollecito Sr. and Mara sitting in the front row of the audience.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Raffaele Sollecito participated in a conference at the University of Bari entitled "The Meredith case and the trial by media".
Next appointment? On TV, where he will be a commentator for a crime program.

LA7 VIDEO




What kinds of things are those people in the video saying??? (It's been my experience that law students are rarely unanimous about ANYTHING so if the comments are ALL leaning one way or the other, with no dissenters, I'll bet the clip has been selectively edited for effect - the rock 'soundtrack', quick cuts, and repeated 'product placement' shots of RS's book suggest to me it was yet another carefully orchestrated PR stunt.)








* As always, I am assuming, of course, that translations of and reportage about the final judgment are accurate.


Last edited by Jackie on Tue Apr 12, 2016 12:31 am, edited 8 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Rumpole


Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:46 pm

Posts: 241

Location: Old Bailey

PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 10:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

When searching for the latest AK motivazioni report I came across this article in an Italian law journal called Diritto Penale Contemporaneo:

La prova del DNA nella pronuncia della Cassazione sul caso Amanda Knox e Raffaele Sollecito

Quote:
Abstract. Nell'annullamento della condanna di Amanda Knox e Raffaele Sollecito un ruolo centrale è stato assunto da alcune questioni connesse alla interpretazione delle tracce di DNA. L'articolo si focalizza su alcuni passaggi della sentenza della Corte di Cassazione, con specifico riferimento all'utilizzo e alla valutazione della prova genetica.

SOMMARIO: 1. DNA fingerprinting, ruolo del giudice e inferenze probabilistiche. - 2. Vero e falso nel concetto di errore nella prova genetica. - 3. Sul mancato rispetto dei protocolli scientifici internazionali. - 4. La ripetibilità del test e la metodologia del low copy number. - 5. Un rilievo finale.


Old pals Joelle Vuille and Franco Taroni write about the role interpretations of DNA evidence had in the annulation of AK and RS sentences. You may recall their earlier writings in, for example, in the book called Wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice - these are probably the same stories translated in Italian.

https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/art ... le/190/pdf

http://www.penalecontemporaneo.it/ricerca/
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 7:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Great translation of Selvaggia Lucarelli, Guermantes, thanks.

This just in from Miriam. Someone started a charge-org petition to keep Sollecito off TV. They are aiming for 25,000. Over 15,000 already signed. That was fast!

https://www.change.org/p/no-a-raffaele- ... WsoTT/f2d5
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:29 pm   Post subject: the lying liar of ISF   

Fast Pete wrote:
Great translation of Selvaggia Lucarelli, Guermantes, thanks.

This just in from Miriam. Someone started a charge-org petition to keep Sollecito off TV. They are aiming for 25,000. Over 15,000 already signed. That was fast!

https://www.change.org/p/no-a-raffaele- ... WsoTT/f2d5


Jeebus. That was fast. Over 15,000 signatures in 24 hours!

Remember how knox struggled to get just 2,000 people (in a nation of over 318,000,000) to sign her petition?

Hidden Content: show
Image


And, unless Google translate is letting me down, the comments about solly are full of anger and disgust.

So much for "Billy's" claim that 'NO ONE in Italy apart from Mach' is questioning the annulment rip)

Ah well, Lyin' Bill's only "36" and, as a "hockey player" who is fit enough to not only skate but fight, he's probably a little distracted right now by the need to train hard for the upcoming playoff season :roll:

Hidden Content: show
Image
Image


_________________________________________________________
ETA: Woah! Another 1000 comments since I posted!

Seems many Italians are not drinking Solly's Kool-Aid or Billy's Screech:

Image
Image
Image
Image

Interesting to see that even Italians find the Supreme Court's about-face to be "strangely" done ...
___________________________________________________________________

E(again)TA:

WOAH! Another 4,000+ signatures!

Image

It's a veritable outpouring. And just imagine how many people share these opinions but are too busy to bother signing up ...

What a mess.

If RS is truly innocent, this is a tragedy. The commentary from his fellow citizens on this petition makes it clear he'll likely never be able to wash off the stain of the accusation.

On the other hand, if he's factually guilty, either as an accomplice or an accessory, he deserves a lot worse.

This 8 year process has served no one well. I just can't figure this case out.

But that's what you get with a slanted system literally designed to favor acquittal over conviction (via BARD, presumption of innocence, right to silence, highly restrictive rules of evidence, etc.) ...

I think I'd prefer a more balanced system designed to favor a discovery of the whole truth - An unlimited right to silence leaves too many questions unanswered. It's antithetical to the investigation and prevention of crime.

There's got to be a better way ... we simply cannot afford to hold justice for the accused more dear than justice for the victim - indeed, as the petition against RS and cases like OJ and Casey Anthony show, this slanted approach doesn't necessarily serve the accused particularly well either: silence in court and a sliver of DOUBT will not fully restore an accused in the eyes of his/her fellow citizens, only the full, unadulterated, unconditional TRUTH (tested in court by way of rigorous cross-examination) can do that.


Last edited by Jackie on Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:58 am, edited 17 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sollecito spoke on the phone with Anton Savage:

Quote:
This morning, in his first Irish radio interview, Raffaele Sollecito spoke to Anton about the case and what happens after the exoneration.


April 12, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito Speaks To Anton (PODCAST)

http://www.todayfm.com/Raffaele-Sollecito-Speaks-To-Anton-

TODAY FM

Yesterday, he also gave an interview to Radio Cusano Campus, a radio station of University Niccolò Cusano (private university in Rome) where he repeated virtually word for word what he said during the meeting at the University of Bari. As I said a long time ago, you wouldn't be able to escape from him as he seems to be everywhere: on the radio, on TV, in print media, on social networks, .... Oh, and what about his alleged TV phobia? I thought he said he didn't watch TV, which caused him panic attacks and fainting spells, and now he himself is inside that feared box? Blimey!
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Fast Pete wrote:
Great translation of Selvaggia Lucarelli, Guermantes, thanks.

This just in from Miriam. Someone started a charge-org petition to keep Sollecito off TV. They are aiming for 25,000. Over 15,000 already signed. That was fast!

https://www.change.org/p/no-a-raffaele- ... WsoTT/f2d5


Anyone may sign, not just Italians :)

Translate:
Quote:
Dear Editor,

It is true: Raffaele Sollecito, who was sentenced in first and second grade, who was finally acquitted of having participated in the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher. Now, without going into the merits of the reasons for the sentence that do not seem to confirm 'beyond reasonable doubt' is not the guilt of the accused, I seem to remember that you are not known for judgments particularly benevolent towards the judiciary so much so that even in 2009 you were sentenced to pay compensation of 25,000 euro for commenting on the arrest of judgment Marcello Dell'Utri comparing the work of the Turin judges to that of the Serbian militias against the Bosnian population.

In the present case, however, shows the opposite tendency, seeming to appreciate the work of the judiciary and makes the following statement: "I urge was finally acquitted by the Supreme Court, has been in prison, he faced all process levels: know the machine Justice better than all of us and let us also his ordeal. Sometimes when I watch TV, I wonder: what is a criminologist? I'm a beautiful girl, I see it too, but where you take the criminologist's degree? I feel very much like Sollecito and if he is a red herring, then I am too. "

Dear Editor, let's assume for a moment that anyone who deals with a process can be a "justice expert" (mah !?). But I am not aware, that there are achievable and measurable educational qualifications in the field of criminology. If you see a woman who works in TV's brings to mind only an aesthetic quality to some extent appearing His words almost discriminatory, the personal feeling and for charity, legitimate, which the approaching urge is far from reflecting the sentiment of deep indignation that you feel when you think of a rare murder brutality which now remains without a culprit.

Dear Editor, I ask you to reconsider the decision to give urge the role of commentator in the program 'The Yellow of the week' transmitted by TgCom24 also out of respect for those, and there are many who can not and will never be able to afford a lawyer as Giulia Bongiorno and the chance to go on TV will never have to speak of their 'ordeal'. It needs more respect for the memory of the victims. Dear Editor, reflect.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 6:41 am   Post subject: B(not)BW   

I see the twitter wars are still raging. I suppose that'll outlast Knox herself.

But who is the singer supposed to be in this one???



Kaypee? Mary? VaseLyn?


PS While I'm on the subject of twitter pics, look what I just found! Isn't THAT a lovely way to distance yourself from the perception that you're frighteningly if not dangerously fixated on the macabre/ Halloween/ Day of the Dead/ scaring people?! (Almost as good as shacking up with a "ghost hunter" who has a "heart full of napalm"!)

Image

But does she out-creep RS??? He's got his grave site biz, his hair tied back in a 'man bun', his article about Marilyn Manson's awesome knife/microphone AND he just posed for pics with the flick knife police confiscated from him all those years ago ...

It's close, but I think I have to give the lead to RS because he landed a job on TV as a "murder expert" - zombie's going to have to up her game, maybe marry Joran van der Sloot, if she intends to win this contest.
Top Profile 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jackie poor RS must be suffering with the latest poll which tells him where to go with his latest venture. Like you say , the former defendants seem to be joined together in some sort of weird competition. RS in his Irish radio interview this week was quite clear the two were not friends having known each other only 5 days. Why not though Amanda is meeting new "tribesman" as she calls them and making instant and strong bonds.
RS posted a link music he likes yesterday on FB. 'Down With The Sickness' by Deception. I'm not familiar with the band which has been around for a while. The lyrics are all about letting the hate out, madness and demons. ' Here it comes get ready to die'. Marie liked his music post so maybe include her in your list of female cartoon warriors.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 12:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Remember those lawyer barzellette a few posts back on the previous page, and the one about "Your appearance here this morning"? That one had the air of an American accent about it.

Well, translator's delight: found the (or, an) original - lawyer jokes are like zombies: they're perpetually circulating.



Quote:
Q: "Mrs. Jones, is your appearance this morning pursuant a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?"
A: "No. This is how I dress when I go to work."


— Steven D Price, illustrated by Marty Bucella, Hilarious Lawyer Jokes: An illustrated caseload of jurisprudential jests, (2015) [Skyhorse Publishing, 2015], p 144. ISBN 9781629147901



Some of the others:
Q: "How far apart were the vehicles at the time of the collision?"
Q: "Were you present when your picture was taken?" (p 138)
Q: "You were there until the time you left, is that true?" (p 137)

“These questions and answers were purportedly taken from actual court records.” says the compiler (p 136). Most of these types of collections cite no sources, frustrating the historian’s instinct. I expect a lot of them would have been newspaper anecdotes originally*, or party quips. Sort of like legal folklore ambience, transmitted down through the generations.


Professor Google’s Recommended Reading:
[Lowe]
[Rinkworks]
[GoogleBooks]:brain paths and the receiver’s network
[And again]: Language and Reality
Etc

*From 1949 maybe: [Crime and Passion]
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 12:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Speaking of Zombies Circulating Perpetually, they’re playing a gig down at the DejaVu Bar every Thursday night and moonlighting as journo scribblers and talkshow dribblers, and rhyming each other for a dime in their spare time.

Da capo, and repeat.
Etc.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 9:05 pm   Post subject: Mach has a LOT of company in Italy!   

Assistance for the "36" year old "hockey playing", "skeptic-Christian" LIAR:

Image

Image

Yo! "Billy"!

STEP 1: Check out the comments written by ITALIANS here --------> https://www.change.org/p/no-a-raffaele- ... WsoTT/f2d5

STEP 2: Apologize to Mach.

STEP 3: Get some help.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 9:30 pm   Post subject: dying on the cross   

Catnip wrote:
Remember those lawyer barzellette a few posts back on the previous page, and the one about "Your appearance here this morning"? That one had the air of an American accent about it.

Well, translator's delight: found the (or, an) original - lawyer jokes are like zombies: they're perpetually circulating.



Quote:
Q: "Mrs. Jones, is your appearance this morning pursuant a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?"
A: "No. This is how I dress when I go to work."


— Steven D Price, illustrated by Marty Bucella, Hilarious Lawyer Jokes: An illustrated caseload of jurisprudential jests, (2015) [Skyhorse Publishing, 2015], p 144. ISBN 9781629147901


Some of the others:
Q: "How far apart were the vehicles at the time of the collision?"
Q: "Were you present when your picture was taken?" (p 138)
Q: "You were there until the time you left, is that true?" (p 137)

“These questions and answers were purportedly taken from actual court records.” says the compiler (p 136). Most of these types of collections cite no sources, frustrating the historian’s instinct. I expect a lot of them would have been newspaper anecdotes originally*, or party quips. Sort of like legal folklore ambience, transmitted down through the generations.


Professor Google’s Recommended Reading:
[Lowe]
[Rinkworks]
[GoogleBooks]:brain paths and the receiver’s network
[And again]: Language and Reality
Etc

*From 1949 maybe: [Crime and Passion]


Reminds me of Jose "lowest ranked law school in Florida" Baez trying to get a cop to admit he should have picked up on Casey Anthony's (alleged) mental illness during her interrogation.

There was a clip on YouTube for years but it's gone now so I'll have to paraphrase a bit:

Baez: When you became aware she was lying, did you ask her if she was seeing a psychiatrist?

Cop: No

Baez: Did you ask her "if she had ever committed suicide?"

Cop: (scrunches up face for effect) Ummmm ...Noooooo.. becauuuuuse she was sitting there right in front of me." ; - )
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:40 pm   Post subject: Post-Annulment Creep Out Contest?   

malvern wrote:
Jackie poor RS must be suffering with the latest poll which tells him where to go with his latest venture. Like you say , the former defendants seem to be joined together in some sort of weird competition. RS in his Irish radio interview this week was quite clear the two were not friends having known each other only 5 days. Why not though Amanda is meeting new "tribesman" as she calls them and making instant and strong bonds.
RS posted a link music he likes yesterday on FB. 'Down With The Sickness' by Deception. I'm not familiar with the band which has been around for a while. The lyrics are all about letting the hate out, madness and demons. ' Here it comes get ready to die'. Marie liked his music post so maybe include her in your list of female cartoon warriors.


Well, Malvern, maybe we should develop a way to keep score to see if Foxy can ultimately concur conquer Solly in their apparent Post-Annulment Creep Out Contest (IMHO, he's off to a BIG lead with that 'man bun')...

I think this would make a great backdrop for the scoreboard:
Image

You know, given the context (the charges + her apparent fixation with the macabre/ Halloween/ Day of the Dead, etc. + his apparent fixation with knives, etc. + Massei + Nencini + the Supreme Court's 'strong suspicion remains' approach), I honestly can't decide which of those photos is the more frightening.

What's the point of spending money on PR pros if you JUST CAN'T RESIST the urge to behave like that???

And what does this behavior tell us about their propensities???


Last edited by Jackie on Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sorry, I haven't managed to make the quote of hidden items work! (It was a Jackie post)

Anyway, have any of you selfless stalwarts following the ISF rubbish challenged our Bill for chapter and verse on his assertion that some 'umbria police union' (sic) has been quoted (anywhere) as having said anything at all?

It would interest me to read it (if it exists). Usually Corriere dellÚmbria would have headlined any such claim in 48 point type, but while taking my coffee and perusing the print edition there is zilch on this potentially explosive story. I may have gone blind....

Any links appreciated.
Top Profile 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Oh I'm having fun on Twitter! Frank Sfarzo does not appear to have heard of any such allegation.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 12:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sallyoo wrote:
Oh I'm having fun on Twitter! Frank Sfarzo does not appear to have heard of any such allegation.


"Bill" is a proven liar (re Nencini "page 243") just like his one-night-only drinking buddy, "Frank" (not his real name) the fugitive/ grifter, who tried to pass himself off as a "film professor", and who tried to deny being detained on an assault charge in Kona despite public court records to the contrary.

I can't trust any of these amateur FOA/IA "advocates".

The whole online campaign has been built on lies peddled by buffoons ('the DNA matches half of Italy', 'the DNA was starch', etc., etc.) and I have to wonder how intelligent people like erasmus44 can behold that disgraceful mess of misrepresentations without feeling the need to run from it (as a lawyer, he could volunteer at a REAL innocence project).
Top Profile 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 12:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Well, maybe I'm being charitably warmed by to much vino, but Frankie's replies have been pretty rational: but he has not (nor has he attempted to) stand up any of Bill's claims. (If I recall correctly our discourse, he denies knowledge of any "Bill"). That's wise of him (IMO).
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 1:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sallyoo wrote:
Well, maybe I'm being charitably warmed by to much vino, but Frankie's replies have been pretty rational: but he has not (nor has he attempted to) stand up any of Bill's claims. (If I recall correctly our discourse, he denies knowledge of any "Bill"). That's wise of him (IMO).


Well, whatever you do, Sallyoo, don't send "Frank" Sfakeo, aka Francesco Sfuggitivo, any money or plane tickets! ;-)

Alas, I'm sorry to hear he's turning his back on ol' "Bill" - grifters are like that, I suppose, but "Billy" there is different - I think he actually has heart and (like the fool he is ) really looked up to the fugitive, so he may be feeling the pangs of unrequited love for a while : (

Hope you've got enough screech on hand, Billy cu-))
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:31 am   Post subject: SCREECH   

Sallyoo wrote:
Well, maybe I'm being charitably warmed by to much vino, but Frankie's replies have been pretty rational: but he has not (nor has he attempted to) stand up any of Bill's claims. (If I recall correctly our discourse, he denies knowledge of any "Bill"). That's wise of him (IMO).


That's because "Bill" isn't his real name, just like "Frank" isn't "Sfarzo" either :)

But "Reverend Bill" did escort Frank from the Canadian border station where his passport was seized, helped hold his hand when he abused his hapless 70 yr. old host, refused to speak up about the abuse he witnessed (70 yr old host pleaded with Frank to corroborate that on IIP, to no avail). "Bill" also presented the bottle of Newfoundland Screech Rum shown, took the picture and posted it on the net, then when the host called the police and threw Frank out, "Reverend Bill" denied that Frank was barred from entering Canada. He is. And "Frank", knows him well.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 4:05 am   Post subject: What would Jesus do?   

Dude looks insane. Not a happy camper. Angry, actually. No surprise it all ended with police intervention. ****ing "screech" sh-))

Is Peter talking to "Bill" anymore? I think that falling out says a lot about "Bill" - I honestly think there's something wrong with him (the lies, quarreling, word-twisting, name-calling, hypocrisy, obsessive posting & piling-on Vixen are all clues, IMHO - he's anything but 'Christlike' in his behavior). Why would he side with a lying, 3 time abuser/ fugitive (who, if you believe the IIP posters, had already worn out his welcome in Seattle with rude/ disrespectful/ inappropriate/ ungrateful/ presumptuous behavior in several homes) over an apparently upstanding senior citizen like Peter who was feeling threatened in his own home?

The double standards are the most galling: he's so quick to shame anyone that calls Knox a slut, but never posts A WORD when Frankie, acby, etc., insult Bettina, Vixen, Skep, etc. in terms of their sexuality.

Did Jesus play favorites like that???
Top Profile 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

guermantes wrote:
Sollecito spoke on the phone with Anton Savage:

Quote:
This morning, in his first Irish radio interview, Raffaele Sollecito spoke to Anton about the case and what happens after the exoneration.


April 12, 2016

Raffaele Sollecito Speaks To Anton (PODCAST)

http://www.todayfm.com/Raffaele-Sollecito-Speaks-To-Anton-

TODAY FM

Yesterday, he also gave an interview to Radio Cusano Campus, a radio station of University Niccolò Cusano (private university in Rome) where he repeated virtually word for word what he said during the meeting at the University of Bari. As I said a long time ago, you wouldn't be able to escape from him as he seems to be everywhere: on the radio, on TV, in print media, on social networks, .... Oh, and what about his alleged TV phobia? I thought he said he didn't watch TV, which caused him panic attacks and fainting spells, and now he himself is inside that feared box? Blimey!


Today FM's email is live@todayfm.com.
I've emailed them pointing out their inaccuracies and invite everyone else to do the same, it won't take long.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:15 am   Post subject: Would Jesus Lie, Swear, Bicker, Mock & Verbally Abuse Vixen?   

There's a puffed-up preacher called "Bill"
Vulgarity, trolling and lying online give him a thrill.
If his flock found him out
Would they give him a shout
Saying “You’re not righteous, you’re ill!”?


(If there's a religious 'method' to his conduct, I don't see it, and neither do the Protestants and Catholics I've consulted.)
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

“Screech” is a brand!? nw)
I thought it was a slang word like hooch, moonshine, and so on.

According to [Wikipedia], it’s both, the brand associating itself with the tradition.

There's even a picture of a row of bottles on the shelf.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 5:40 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Recent news is fairly quiet:


Brigitta will open a 2000-person disco at Narni Scalo. House Bulgari has obtained an injunction against her from using the stage name Bulgari, so she’ll become Diamod, apparently [?a misprint for "Diamond"?]. The wait-persons [i.e., staff] will be dressed “in maniera sexy”, but no strip-tease or lap-dancing.
[CdU]


Anomalous Saharan summer-like heat is back for a bit.
[CdU]


“Baby Gangs” (child delinquents) are on the prowl, vandalising, dealing drugs, etc. 82 were identified, five ended up “up the creek” so to speak, with one of them being sent to children’s prison in Florence.
On the trains and environs, there were menaces and aggression by the same two main groups of adolescents, relying on their age as immunity, but they found out the reality was otherwise when it comes to vandalism and drug-dealing.
[u24]


The Perugian prosecutor-general made an institutional visit to the local questura, meeting Police Chief Carmelo Gugliotta, and speaking briefly about police work, and about infiltration by mafia organisations and the battle against terrorism in current international scenarios. The visit was fruitful, with suggestions and so on for daily police work.
[ANSA]

Anti-prostitution ordinances start on Monday, coinciding with the arrival of warmer weather. Signed into effect by Mayor Andrea Romizi, they’ll remain in force until 31 October. Certain streets have been added this time, and others removed from the list. The fine is unchanged from previous years, 450 euro. At the same time, based on the number of accidents occurring, a traffic light camera unit will be relocated (at a cost of $10k euro) to the via Baracca and via Madonna Alta intersection.
[u24]

A suspected terrorist, 31, Tunisian, was repatriated from Capanne Prison. A habitual criminal (drug dealing, violence), he apparently became radicalized while in prison. Given his violent behaviour, he was escorted while on the plane and handed over to Tunisian police.
[UJ]

Amanda Knox acquitted of calunnia against the police. The case turned into an investigation of police techniques and procedure. The Florence court attacked the “unreliable records of interview”, contested the “unfortunate choices” of the interpreters attached to the police, and the “apparently softened-and-sweetened method adopted by the investigators and their helpers” treating Amanda in “a maternal and friendly way” notwithstanding “the evidence emerging against her”.
[u24]

= = =




Sallyoo wrote:
... his assertion that some 'umbria police union' (sic) has been quoted (anywhere) ...



From the timing of the calunnia-acquittal news, a reference to “police union” might be a harking back and hangover reference to the first reports a couple of years ago about who was suing (as civil party) in the calunnia trial(s).
Top Profile 

Offline Hennesy


Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 6:52 pm

Posts: 137

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Netflix is making a documentary on Amanda Knox, shall we contact them? Anything we can do to give them accurate info on the case?

http://www.screendaily.com/news/amanda- ... 54.article
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:45 pm   Post subject: Fat, drunk & stupid v. Perugia law enforcement   

Catnip wrote:
“Screech” is a brand!? nw)
I thought it was a slang word like hooch, moonshine, and so on.

According to [Wikipedia], it’s both, the brand associating itself with the tradition.

There's even a picture of a row of bottles on the shelf.



"Dean Wormer" said it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkoPq5AOCOA

(It's tough to find someone worthy of respect on knox's furrier's "board" of "advisors" - I'm down to 2 'maybes' and 2 unknowns.)


Catnip wrote:
...
Amanda Knox acquitted of calunnia against the police. The case turned into an investigation of police techniques and procedure. The Florence court attacked the “unreliable records of interview”, contested the “unfortunate choices” of the interpreters attached to the police, and the “apparently softened-and-sweetened method adopted by the investigators and their helpers” treating Amanda in “a maternal and friendly way” notwithstanding “the evidence emerging against her”.
[u24]

= = =


They were too friendly to her?!

I'm really looking forward to seeing how that plays out.

Evidently, not many on the pro-prosecution side agree with my assertion that the Nov. 5/6 interview is the cornerstone of this case but ... that's how I feel.

What's going on here?! Do I have this right: the Supreme Court finalized its take (calunnia against PL stands), but this lower court in Florence now finds that K did NOT defame the police by asserting they beat her into accusing PL???

If so ... what a mess! In answer to the simple question, "Was K coerced or wasn't she?", we have a tangled web of apparently contradictory opinions from no less than 6 different panels (and counting): Massei, Hellmann, Supreme Court Version 1.0, Nencini, Supreme Court Version 2.0, and, now, a trial court in Florence, which presumably will lead into yet another round of (potentially contradictory) appellate court rulings ...

The whole idea of a separate proceeding on this point strikes me as not only an affront to the doctrine of judicial economy but grossly unfair to the defendant - in this case, making a show of filing additional charges mid-trial gave me the impression that the police had a recording which, for some (uniquely Italian) legal reason was inadmissible in the murder trial but which would be admissible in a separate defamation trial in order to PROVE Knox was lying about being hit ("surely they wouldn't bother if they had nothing but their word against hers", I thought), and this had the effect of coloring my assessment of the case against K.


Last edited by Jackie on Sat Apr 16, 2016 9:54 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:53 pm   Post subject: What are they really made of?   

Hennesy wrote:
Netflix is making a documentary on Amanda Knox, shall we contact them? Anything we can do to give them accurate info on the case?

http://www.screendaily.com/news/amanda- ... 54.article


I think they should show how tastefully K marked the anniversary of Meredith's murder in 2015 (replete with her idiotic meditation on how we "concur" conquer death, published in the WSH), and how clearly S enjoyed making a show of being reunited with his flick knife in 2016:


Image

And, of course, it would be nice to see a professional journalist cover what the Supreme Court ACTUALLY wrote about K & S, but I doubt that will happen. It seems that, for the US audience, the fix is in. Just as none of them will ever see her in Zombie Mode for Halloween/ Day of the Dead/ the Anniversary of MK's Murder, it's likely none of them will learn that the Supreme Court found that SHE WAS THERE (despite her insisting otherwise to Diane Sawyer).
Top Profile 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

RS 2nd call: Police: "So, break in and theft?" (routine)
Rs: "No, nothing's been stolen"

Why did he say that when he knew that eventually the door would be broken in completely. Was he trying to automatically minimise, psychologically divert from the issue. As with Knox 'Meredith always locked her door'.

Can only be for one reason. He thought that somehow, they could continue the coverup. He could find a way to get rid of the police. He didn't want a full discovery, but he HAD to phone in about the window.

I really can't understand why he said that. Yes, he was certain that nothing had been stolen. Did he feel that he may also be blamed for a theft?
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 12:31 am   Post subject: Re: Fat, drunk & stupid v. Perugia law enforcement   

Judicial economy:

The phrase "an infinity of time" (which was used once), comes to mind.


Last edited by Catnip on Sun Apr 17, 2016 12:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 12:32 am   Post subject: Re: Fat, drunk & stupid v. Perugia law enforcement   

Catnip wrote:
Jackie wrote:
... in this case, making a show of filing additional charges mid-trial gave me the impression that the police had a recording which, for some (uniquely Italian) legal reason was inadmissible in the murder trial but which would be admissible in a separate defamation trial in order to PROVE Knox was lying about being hit ("surely they wouldn't bother if they had nothing but their word against hers", I thought), and this had the effect of coloring my assessment of the case against K.



It’s a road-rule for the Prosecution Buggy. Mustn’t read too much into it: the decision to prosecute is more like a committal hearing (here) or a Grand Jury (where you are), rather than the ADA saying, “Go for it!”.

Once an offence has become known, the Criminal Procedure Code imposes upon the Public Prosecutor an obligation to prosecute that offence. There is no discretion. (In practice, since the Code specifies no time period constraints, a discretion arises as to when to start the prosecutorial wheels turning, so that, as a consequence, low-priority matters tend to get shuffled down the to-do list when there’s a full in-tray.)

The calunnia against the police was asserted in court, during testimony, and that event opened the door to criminal proceedings.

In the Civil Law system(s), the Court must reach its own conclusion on the matter (as do Common Law courts, but that requirement is often hidden or de-emphasised when comparing and contrasting the two systems, and discussing ‘binding’ precedent).

What another court may or may not have said is technically of no import as to this court’s unfettered opinion on the matter. Cassation is merely affirming and confirming whether that court applied the law correctly, and Cassation will do the same to this court (eventually). (Although, this assumes that Cassation is always acting rationally, in the strict medical sense.)

Of course, in real-life consistency and coherency are to be expected, and Cassation pronouncements on procedure must logically be binding on all courts, because of their being made at Code-level, rather than case-level. (For example, how to examined circumstantial evidence; how to construct a reasoned judgment.)

But, in real-life, again, even in the Common Law system, an appeal court may state what needs to be done, but a lower court actually does something which results in, on subsequent appeal from it, the words “but procedure was not followed” being used.

So, in sum, prosecuting only implies that there is a prima facie case to answer, not that the result is necessarily given or a slam-dunk (although, in some cases, obviously it will be logically unavoidable).

That the first-instance Florence court has invented a defence of dreaming to the charge of making a knowingly false accusation will have some interesting consequences playing out on appeal, I expect (and also in the various mafia-infiltration update strategy meetings going on around the place).

There is also the wider question of a court adopting ‘fixed-point’ reasoning (logically specious) as part of its own ‘unfettered’ opinion on the matter, especially where the overall case is ‘split’, as here. The result is an overall irrationality. (It’s not necessarily intentionally irrational – same thing happens in Common Law, where, because different judges in the same appeal or different appeals come up with different decisions and/or reason(s) – perfectly rational on their own –, the overall situation remains unclarified, snarled, confused, conflicting, and so on.)


= = =
P.S.
Animal House is such a wonderful film – it brought back so many memories when I first saw it.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 12:42 am   Post subject: METTE HEIDE PLUS PICTURES   

Hennesy wrote:
Netflix is making a documentary on Amanda Knox, shall we contact them? Anything we can do to give them accurate info on the case?

http://www.screendaily.com/news/amanda- ... 54.article


You can contact the producer Mette Heide and point out ways in which the documentary could retain some balance. Though seeing as how they got 'exclusive interviews' with Knocks in 2014 and Nick Pisa is a consultant :) I say meh. It's a Netflix doc, which means a few hundred people will see it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:
RS 2nd call: Police: "So, break in and theft?" (routine)
Rs: "No, nothing's been stolen"

Why did he say that when he knew that eventually the door would be broken in completely. ...




He was doing the good-citizen thing:

エツ
e-tsu
call on (a superior)

Only he got mixed up.


In essence, putting it into script-writer English, the call went like this:

Him: Hello. There’s been a break-in.
Centre: How do you know?
Him: There are signs of a break-in. But nothing’s been stolen.
Centre (surprised): What?
Him (switching topics): There’s blood, and there's the problem of the locked door.
Centre (even more surprised, a bit of confusion): Door!? What door?
Him: A friend. She’s not answering.
Centre: I’ll send a patrol.



= = =
The very first news report, in the confusion of the first moments and before anyone knew anything really, was saying that it seemed that a burglar had broken in, had injured himself, and had locked himself in a room and may or may not have had possibly escaped through the window.

Keeping four stories straight is an effort, even more so for people who constantly self-medicate for anxiety reasons.

The four stories are:
  • what an innocent person in real-life would probably say and do in a burglar situation (report a break-in)
  • what the ‘burglar’ would have done and said, if it were real-life (break-in through window, actually steal stuff, run away)
  • what the burglar’s story, and his ‘motivation’ (in a script sense), was, and how that story came about and was developed (to make the staging 'realistic', and to do the actual staging)
  • what actually happened (no computers, sunglasses, etc removed from premises)



Part 2 of the story of course was that the burglar had locked the door, because behind the door was a murder and sexual assault, and the burglar didn't want to be caught for that, and he ran away before he could steal the computer, sunglasses etc. Part 2 was not thought out clearly, and/or self-medication clogged the ears somewhat.


To be partly facetious for a moment, if this were an Agatha Christie detective novel, it might have the title of "The Problem of the Locked Door".
Top Profile 

Offline Hennesy


Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 6:52 pm

Posts: 137

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 7:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

"No there is no theft" is pretty condemning evidence about Sollecito, but I thought about it and:

since he called the police after Battistelli and Marsi showed up, I am thinking he cannot be that stupid to give himself away like that - or maybe he can - I think he says "there is no theft" confidently because 10 minutes prior to him calling the police, Battistelli said to Knox and Sollecito: "this break-in seems fake". I read this in the Massei testimony, it was either Marsi or Battistelli admitting when they saw Filomena's room they said right away that it looked fake. So this is one explanation. The other one is plain and simple: he is a retard, told them there was no theft and then felt stupid and hung up.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Some random quotations recycled, for the weekend and the light of the Full Moon.




PUT TO GOOD USE

“A handsaw is a good thing - but not to shave with. (England)” — Max Cryer, Preposterous Proverbs: Why fine words butter no parsnips, (2011) [Exisle Publishing, 2011], p64.



CHERCHEZ LA FEMME

“There seems to be a consistent willingness for juries, prosecuting attorneys, and citizens generally to side with female defendants who stand accused of committing heinous crimes.” — James Alan Fox and Jack Levin, Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder, 2nd edition, (2012) [SAGE, 2012], at p73.



NOT THE SHARPEST TACK

“Criminals tend to be dull and stupid – two reasons why most of them get caught. (The few exceptions to this rule write books.) Their offences are usually unimaginative and their motives almost always banal.” — Liz Porter, Cold Case Files, (2011) [Pan Macmillan, 2011], at p xv.



LANGUAGE

“… it is power, it is speech, … which is pleasing to the heart of Ra and satisfactory to the hearts of his tribunal who watch over men. ‘Give to him’, says Ra, ‘and lead him’. May he be gracious to you at the stairway of any tribunal in any court and at any place in which your god is gracious to you.” — R O Faulkner, The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts: Spells 1 – 1185 & Indexes, (1973) [Aris & Phillips, 2007], from Spell 25 (vol 1, p16).




WHAT’S NOT TO CONTAMINATE?

“There are many myths and misunderstandings about contamination,… The first is that all scenes are examined using the highest standard of anti-contamination standards (suits, overshoes, mob caps, gloves, etc.), which is not the case. Most volume crime scenes (burglaries, stolen vehicles) are examined by CSIs who are not wearing such protection, although they will generally wear gloves and masks when taking samples such as DNA. Secondly, the belief that contamination can be completely prevented by wearing the kinds of protection described above and by controlling a scene is unfounded. If you accept Locard’s principle, then you have to accept that any examination of a scene is likely to disturb it and to ‘contaminate’ it in some way. Finally, the assumption that someone has failed (for whatever reason) to follow recommended operating procedures with regard to contamination does not mean that contamination will necessarily result and have an impact.” — Jim Fraser, Forensic Science: A Very Short Introduction, (2010) [Oxford University Press, 2010], at pp19-20. ISBN 9780199558056



SPECULATOR

“In R v J (1994) 75 A Crim R 522 (Vic CCA) Brooking J said (at 531): ‘… An expert should explain the basis of theory or experience on which the expert conclusions are said to rest…’ … In HG v The Queen (1999) 197 CLR 414; 160 ALR 554 Gleeson CJ said of a psychologist (at 428; 563 [41]): ‘…. a reading of his report, and his evidence at the committal, reveals that it was based on a combination of speculation, inference, personal and second-hand views as to the credibility of the complainant, and a process of reasoning which went well beyond the field of expertise of a psychologist.’” — David Ross QC, Ross on Crime, 4th edition, (2009) [Thomson Lawbook Co, 2009], at [5.2330] (p580).



WATER FLOWS

“‘[T]he question here is aqua profluens, …for water hath its natural course…natura sua descendit…[T]he watercourse does not begin by the consent of the parties, nor by prescription, but ex jurae naturae, …’ – Sury v Pigot, Poph. 166, 170; 79 ER 1263, 1267, per Whitlock CJ (King’s Bench).” — Joshua Getzler, A History of Water Rights at Common Law, (2004) [Oxford University Press, 2011], at p131. ISBN 9780199207602




BAMBOO BRAIN

“笨 bèn: = stupid. There are some joints in bamboo. It means “can’t pass through”, like a person who can’t use his brain.” — Da Shiping and Wendy Da, Magical Chinese Characters 2: Radicals for Learning Chinese Characters, (2008) [Beijing University Press, 2008], at p14.




THE IRRATIONAL IS DRAMATIC

“many films and television dramas involving court cases where the parties spend considerable time and energy manipulating the judge and the jury in an endeavour to obtain a finding which is favourable to their client. Trial based on an adversarial process (as distinct from an inquisitorial one) is a battle. Battles are won by tactics and the tactic here is manipulation of truth.” — Christopher Enright, Legal Technique, (2002) [The Federation Press, 2002], at [36.15] (p407). ISBN 9781862874123



ANCIENT OPERA

“Sappiamo, del resto, che il re d’Oriel, quando ebbe ascoltato l’ode composta da Dallán in suo onore, esclamò estasiato: «Stupendo. Peccato che non ho capito nulla».” — Enrico Campanile, “Antichità indoeuropee”, in Enrico Campanile, Bernard Comrie and Calvert Watkins, Introduzione alla lingua e alla cultura degli Indoeuropei, (2005) [il Mulino, 2011] (Introduction to Indo-european Language and Culture, extract from the volume, Le lingue indoeuropee (The Indo-European Languages), edited by A Giacalone Ramat and P Ramat, 2nd ed., il Mulino 1994, pp19-122), pp 9-37, at p37.

(Translation: We know, for the rest, that the King of Oriel, when he had heard the ode composed in his honour by Dallán, exclaimed enthusiatiscally, “Stupendous! Pity I didn’t understand a word of it.”)



LEGALISMS

“Sigmatic futures such as faxit = fecerit and mulcassitis = mulcaueritis were in decline over a long period and are virtually non-existent in the late Republic except in archaising legal style.” — J N Adams, The Regional Diversification of Latin 200 BC – AD 600, (2007) [Cambridge University Press, 2007], at p16. ISBN 9780521881494



FOLLOW THE CLUES, HANSEL!

“Our first concern when dealing with a performance text as creator, director, actor or audience is to identify the particular focus of the playwright. We need to work out what narrative we want to explore or what the text means, and how this should be achieved in performance. This is just as crucial for the texts we create as those we perform or view.” — Bruce Burton, Living Drama, 4th edition, (2011) [Pearson, 2012], at [6.2] (p73). ISBN 9781442533882



THE BIG-NOTE TEMPTATION, aka Counsel

“How many disciplines are there where you can write a script and play a leading part?” — David Ross QC, Advocacy, 2nd edition, (2007) [Cambridge University Press, 2009], at [1030] (p2) ISBN 9780521884761



THE REALITY DOES NOT MATCH THE APPEARANCE

“Many cases win or lose themselves because the evidence and the law that is applied are all one way. In these cases advoacy is rather like an exercise in damage control” — David Ross QC, Advocacy, 2nd edition, (2007) [Cambridge University Press, 2009], at [1075] (p5). ISBN 9780521884761



LOGIC++

“Logic crops up in court more often than you would expect. One example is the so-called “bootstraps” argument, where the fact to be proved assumes the existence of that fact. – R (Jackson) v Attorney-General [2006] 1 AC 262 at 288 [48] per Lord Nicholls; Ahern v The Queen (1988) 165 CLR 87 at 95.” — David Ross QC, Advocacy, 2nd edition, (2007) [Cambridge University Press, 2009], at [1120] (p8). ISBN 9780521884761



LANGUAGE II

“…appropriate type of writing for the academic world … is reasoned and structured and backs its statements with evidence, data, theory or some similar underpinning that makes the piece part of a wider and continuous discourse. It is different from journalism, even sober stories about important themes, and very different from the declamatory tones of most blogspeak, or the language of ‘commentards’,* or our everyday ways of talking and writing for each other.” — Steve Ball, The Complete Guide to Writing Your Dissertation: Advice, techniques and insights to help you enhance your grades, (2012) [HowTo Books, 2012], at pp109-110. ISBN 9781845284541


“In case this word is new to you, it is an unkind term applied to those people who regularly append comments to online news articles, blogs and so on. It is unkind because the ending ‘-ard’ comes from the pejorative US term ‘retard’, which towards the end of the first decade of this century was already being adopted and applied to people who expect everything to be free on the internet (‘freetards’) and has since been extended to other groups.” — Steve Ball, The Complete Guide to Writing Your Dissertation: Advice, techniques and insights to help you enhance your grades, (2012) [HowTo Books, 2012], at p109 n2. ISBN 9781845284541



THE CHOICE

“The same motif of the wrong choice appears in the tale of the monk, who, constrained by the Devil to choose between drunkenness, fornication and murder, chose the first sin as the least of the three, then in his drunkenness also carried out the other two.” — Carlo Della Casa, Corso di Sanscrito: Grammatica, esercizi, brani scelti, vocabolario, 2nd edition, (1998) [Edizioni Unicopli, 1998] (A Sanskrit Course: Grammar, exercises, selected passages, vocabulary), at 88 note 1. ISBN 9788840007008



MUST BEGIN SOMEWHERE

“It is unusual to teach a course on crime scene photography without receiving several out-of-focus photographs from a student.” — Edward M Robinson, Crime Scene Photography, 2nd edition, (2010) [Elsevier, 2010], at p155. ISBN 9780123757289



LANGUAGE III

“Lawyers are perfectionists and their stock-in-trade is accuracy of expression.” — David Pope & Dan Hill, Mooting and Advocacy Skills, 2nd edition, [Sweet & Maxwell / Thomson Reuters, 2010], [4.20] (p48). ISBN 9780414044869



MULTI-LEVELS

“many legal arguments comprise a series of ideas interlocking at various levels” — Anita Stuhmcke, Legal Referencing, 4th edition, (2012) [LexisNexis Butterworths, 2012], at p58. ISBN 9780409328547



NOT IMPRESSED

“Few judges, whether sitting in a moot court or any other court, are impressed by the use of extravagant adjectives such as “outrageous”, “appalling” and “hopeless”.” — David Pope & Dan Hill, Mooting and Advocacy Skills, 2nd edition, [Sweet & Maxwell / Thomson Reuters, 2010], [4.40] (p57). ISBN 9780414044869



NOT IMPRESSED II

“In Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited v Commissioner of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2006] EWCA Civ 772; [2006] All ER (D) 164, for example, the Court of Appeal castigated a skeleton argument for its “frequent and unnecessary resort to hyperbole”.” — David Pope & Dan Hill, Mooting and Advocacy Skills, 2nd edition, [Sweet & Maxwell / Thomson Reuters, 2010], [4.40] (p57 n12). ISBN 9780414044869



JUDGES

“Pur dishonest Judgm’t Judges povent estre punv. Mirror de Justices report que 44 fueront pendus pur cest cause” — James William Norton-Kyshe, The Dictionary of Legal Quotations: Or, Selected dicta of English Chancellors and Judges from the earliest periods to the present time, (1904/2012) [Sweet and Maxwell 1904 / facsimile reprint of exemplar from the University of Michigan by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, Kessinger Publishing LLC, 2012], at p121. ISBN 9781166320119

Trans: For dishonest judgments, Judges may be punished. The Mirror of Justices reports that 44 were hung for this reason.



LANGUAGE IV

“Chi si accontenta di esprimersi in maniera imprecisa può non accorgersi che nella sua mente certe distinzioni non sono chiare.” ("Those who remain satisfied with expressing themselves in an imprecise manner may not be aware that, in their mind, certain distinctions are unclear.") — Eduardo Lombardi Vallauri, Parlare I'italiano: Come usare meglio la nostra lingua, (2012) [il Mulino, 2013] (Speaking Italian: How to better use our language), p 90. ISBN 9788815239730



LANGUAGE V

“Die Sprache ist die Waffe der Juristen. Denn Recht ist vor allem Sprache. Wem die Sprachkompetenz fehlt, der wird Denkkompetenz kaum erlangen.” — Holm Putzke, Juristische Arbeiten erfolgreich schreiben: Klausuren, Hausarbeiten, Seminare, Bachelor- und Masterarbeiten, 4th edition, (2012) [C H Beck, 2012] (Writing Successful Legal Essays: Exams, homework, seminars, undergraduate and Masters' theses), [67] at p23). ISBN 9783406636066

: Language is the lawyer’s weapon. Law is above all language. Whoever fails in language, also fails in thinking.




BEWARE THE CIRCLING SHARK

In the High Court Kirby J often tested the patience of his colleagues by lengthy interruptions of counsel on peripheral matters. Gleeson CJ gave the gentlest of swipes back during the hearing of the appeal in Antoun v The Queen [[2005] HCATrans 823] when there was the following exchange:

Quote:
KIRBY J: Of course the Bench is made up of a myriad of different personalities and people have different ways of expressing themselves and some are more circumlocutious and longwinded than others. Others are given to more direct expression.

MR BYRNE: Certainly.

KIRBY J: I think you would agree that the silent judge is the greatest menace of all.

GLEESON CJ: One of the greatest.



— Keith Mason, Lawyers Then and Now: An Australian Legal Miscellany, (2012) [The Federation Press, 2012], pp 55-56. ISBN 9781862878907
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 2:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Catnip wrote:
ttrroonniicc wrote:
RS 2nd call: Police: "So, break in and theft?" (routine)
Rs: "No, nothing's been stolen"

Why did he say that when he knew that eventually the door would be broken in completely. ...

He was doing the good-citizen thing:

エツ
e-tsu
call on (a superior)

Only he got mixed up.


In essence, putting it into script-writer English, the call went like this:

Him: Hello. There’s been a break-in.
Centre: How do you know?
Him: There are signs of a break-in. But nothing’s been stolen.
Centre (surprised): What?
Him (switching topics): There’s blood, and there's the problem of the locked door.
Centre (even more surprised, a bit of confusion): Door!? What door?
Him: A friend. She’s not answering.
Centre: I’ll send a patrol.



= = =
The very first news report, in the confusion of the first moments and before anyone knew anything really, was saying that it seemed that a burglar had broken in, had injured himself, and had locked himself in a room and may or may not have had possibly escaped through the window.

Keeping four stories straight is an effort, even more so for people who constantly self-medicate for anxiety reasons.

The four stories are:
  • what an innocent person in real-life would probably say and do in a burglar situation (report a break-in)
  • what the ‘burglar’ would have done and said, if it were real-life (break-in through window, actually steal stuff, run away)
  • what the burglar’s story, and his ‘motivation’ (in a script sense), was, and how that story came about and was developed (to make the staging 'realistic', and to do the actual staging)
  • what actually happened (no computers, sunglasses, etc removed from premises)



Part 2 of the story of course was that the burglar had locked the door, because behind the door was a murder and sexual assault, and the burglar didn't want to be caught for that, and he ran away before he could steal the computer, sunglasses etc. Part 2 was not thought out clearly, and/or self-medication clogged the ears somewhat.


To be partly facetious for a moment, if this were an Agatha Christie detective novel, it might have the title of "The Problem of the Locked Door".


Or, her 1937 Hercule Poirot mystery, Dumb Witness :)

Did Agatha Christie ever have dumb witnesses/suspects like these two? They were always intelligent that I recall, but then, that was fiction.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I don't pay as much attention to Them as They pay to the rest of us, so I've only just noticed that erasmus44, whose every statement about Meredith's case has been factually wrong by 180 degrees because he simply trots out false groupie memes, has been making excuses for himself.

'Oh, but I got this medical chit so I didn't have to go to Vietnam!' Yes... people used to pay doctors for those, didn't they? And he's subsequently had heart treatment, but probably quite a lot of men who did serve in Vietnam have also had heart treatment.

'Oh, but I marched with Dr King!' Yes... well, that's what the cool kids were doing. But it's a bit like 'Some of my best friends are Jews,' isn't it? And many Americans who claims to be 'liberals' are so far to the right of Genghiz Khan that, if the great khan sent his finest and fleetest cavalry off on his right wing to search for them, the horsemen would ride clean off the edge of the flat, medieval world before they ever found them. And erasmus44 is profoundly wedded to the view that nice white American co-eds don't commit nasty crimes and it's always the black guy who did it, and he won't hear anything else. erasmus44 is a 'Cops fried four hard drives!' kinda guy. He doesn't master his brief -- the first thing they teach you in law school, I'd have thought -- he just follows his prejudices.

'Oh, but I've read PMF and TJMK and Follain!' Yes... for the purpose of discounting everything you've read, which is why you talk such complete, nasty, biased, bigoted rubbish about Meredith's case, Mr Mause.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:45 am   Post subject: CCTV VIDEOS   

The Wiki file library has the Sant'Antonio Parking Garage Video

CCTV files from the garage across the street from the cottage. These files are movies made from screen capturing playback of CCTV flicks. The CCTV flicks are proprietary and require a proprietary program for viewing that was typically provided on the CCTV discs found in the archives. The CCTV flicks are not movies. They are slide shows of images recorded by the CCTV cameras in the garage. The cameras are motion / light activated and camera sensitivity is rather low, designed to capture cars entering and exiting the parking garage. The cameras themselves do not record for long periods even if there is car activity. So the slideshows often have gaps, sometimes as small as quarter of a second, but often for much longer. Finally, the cameras are also subject to high flare and image resolution is also low and noisy particularly at night.

There are at least 15 cameras at the garage, but we have only found CCTV footage for cameras 7, 11 and 15. CCTV sequences are from 00:00 AM November 1st to 22:00 November 2nd, with time gaps in camera 7.
Camera 15 covers exiting traffic at the top deck. It is positioned over the eastern stairwell and covers the eastern half of he top deck.
Camera 11 covers exiting traffic at the middle deck. It is positioned over the garage's east exit and captures a bit of traffic on via dell Pergola, as well as tiny bits of traffic exiting from the lower and top decks of the garage.
Camera 7 covers entering traffic at the garage's middle deck. It is positioned just inside the garage's west entrance and looks northwestward. It captures traffic on via della Pergola, and, on rare occasion, captures traffic entering and exiting the cottage driveway which is just across the street and just outside the camera's frame (to the right). The driveway ramp sinks below the via dell Pergola. Photos will soon be provided to clarify these locations. Camera 7 footage is complete for November 1st, but for November 2nd, there is only footage from 06:00 to roughly 14:30.

All camera sequences by chronology

These movies are playbacks of CCTV from cameras 7, 11 and 15, played chronologically, irrespective of camera. Therefore the sequences jump from one camera to the other. They are captured at the default resolution and size of the proprietary playback program.

NOTE: The controls bar for the Wiki video player unfortunately hides the captured timestamps of the CCTV footage (shown as a blue horizontal bar at the bottom of the movie). Sometimes moving the mouse outside the movie frame will 'disappear' the controls bar and reveal the timestamp, but not always. We recommend to right-click on the link, download the file and use a player that shows the full frame of the movie, including the time stamp.

November 1, 2007

2007-11-01-0000-to-0100-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0100-to-0200-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0200-to-0300-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0300-to-0400-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0400-to-0500-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0500-to-0600-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0600-to-0700-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0700-to-0800-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0800-to-0900-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-0900-to-1000-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1000-to-1100-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1100-to-1200-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1200-to-1300-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1300-to-1400-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1400-to-1500-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1500-to-1600-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1600-to-1700-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1700-to-1800-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1800-to-1900-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-1900-to-2000-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-2000-to-2100-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-2100-to-2200-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-2200-to-2300-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-01-2300-to-2400-cameras-7-11-15.mp4

November 2, 2007

2007-11-02-0000-to-0100-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0100-to-0200-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0200-to-0300-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0300-to-0500-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0500-to-0600-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0600-to-0700-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0700-to-0800-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0800-to-0900-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-0900-to-1000-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1000-to-1100-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1100-to-1200-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1200-to-1300-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1300-to-1400-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1400-to-1500-cameras-7-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1500-to-1600-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1600-to-1700-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1700-to-1800-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1800-to-1900-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-1900-to-2000-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-2000-to-2100-cameras-11-15.mp4
2007-11-02-2100-to-2200-cameras-11-15.mp4
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Respect for the police people that had to watch all of those :) I was just curious if I could see anything across the street in the early morning when Knox went shopping and probably headed for the cottage. The light is so bright that you can't even see anything on the other side of the street. They got some stupid luck.
Top Profile 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Knife Boy speaks up on the petition against him being a telly celeb and criminologist expert egghead high brow type.
https://www.change.org/p/no-a-raffaele-sollecito-esperto-di-giustizia-a-mediasettgcom24/u/16247303?tk=sf90fZORhG9WGfhcegp0jbdk2SXGc35RgDL8twOMx28&utm_source=petition_update&utm_medium=email
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

OT:
Found another tidbit of info for Jackie about why “attorney” is still a rude word (or the ghost of one, depending on where you are):

Quote:
“The main focus of the wrath [against lawyers in the 17th century] was towards attorneys (from the French atourner – to turn over to another, the barrister), who were often very corrupt. In fact when a new group of legal practitioners, solicitors, established an association in 1739 that would eventually replace the attorneys, it called itself The Society of Gentlemen Practisers in the Courts of Law and Society. It eventually changed its name to the Law Society. These lawyers were not of the same class as barristers, but they hoped the new title would distinguish than [sic – read: them] from the attorneys. In fact their activities, including control and discipline of their members, led to a rise in their status and standing. [citing B Abel-Smith and R Stevens, Lawyers and the Courts (Heinemann Educational Books 1967) pp 20-22]”

— Stan Ross, The Joke's on … Lawyers, (1996) [The Federation Press, 1996], p 13. ISBN 9781862872400, a book about lawyer jokes and how they came to be.




On the other hand, to reverse the rude words around, there’s the story from the 1980s of that Australian solicitor who went on holidays to Canada, no problems there, but when she was about to cross the border into the US and truthfully answered the question “What is your occupation?”, she was very surprised at the reaction. :shock: It was all sorted out in the end, though.


To explain for our international readers: Since there are no solicitors in the US (at least, under that name, soliciting for legal representation, because there's no need, since there are no barristers in the US either), linguistically that leaves the case that the only solicitors there (soliciting for sex = prostitutes) are the ones that happen to be on the wrong side of the prison cell door. (Not that legal solicitors never get into trouble, either, what with trust fund temptations, and so on.)
Top Profile 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
Respect for the police people that had to watch all of those :) I was just curious if I could see anything across the street in the early morning when Knox went shopping and probably headed for the cottage. The light is so bright that you can't even see anything on the other side of the street. They got some stupid luck.


Certainly! And the police personnel trawled through not only the 'films' (posted by Ergon in manageable chunks) but also they had more 'footage' from other cameras. In a police report they say that they only concentrated on those three cameras (the other garage cameras were considered to be of no interest), and they also report that they looked at (iirc) four 'street' cameras (without finding anything of interest).

In 2007 Perugia there were not many cctv cameras, and those that there were often didn't work, and the quality of the images would have been dire. Even having said that, it is notable that in testimony (and reports) there is very little reference made even to the cctv which was examined: (we have the tow truck, the postal police, and a possible sighting of Guede) - that's all.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 10:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

It was another editor that posted the CCTV, Sallyoo. I just the messenger :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2016 1:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Have just started reading the very useful

Expert Evidence – Crime Scene Examination
John Horswell, Douglas Elliot (ThomsonReuters, electronic version)

Each jurisdiction is slightly different, finding its own way historically on how to do things. Even basic matters. For example, about who attends a scene: police (sworn or unsworn), civilians, scientists, detectives with specialists, fully trained detectives doing a full examination, etc. There are many variations.

[98.10] “It is therefore impossible to draw up a specific “best practice” for crime scene management and examination.”

That explains that, then.

Actually, the “Bongiorno’s assertion” gambit can be played with other things besides forensics.

For example, the procedure for laying a criminal charge is different in New South Wales compared with New York, just to take two jurisdictions at random. So Bongiorno can say: “The NYPD/ADA (or: the NSW DPP) did not follow standard international guidelines and protocols (cite the other jurisdiction’s custom) when doing X, so therefore my client must be acquitted.”

Putting it like that shows where the fallacy in the argument lies.

Bongiorno-ising morning tea at the cafe: “This piece of cake was not baked/decorated/delivered/presented on a plate/served according to international standards (cite Missouri road-side diner instruction manual as proof), therefore a refund is due.”

"Apply as required", say the instructions on the tin of paint.
Top Profile 

Offline olleosnep


Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 12:03 pm

Posts: 117

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2016 2:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

"International standards" is a fallacy all by itself. Apart from ISO standards there are no other truly 'international standards' that have worldwide application or relevance.

In the US there are two 'competing' building codes (there used to be four(!)): NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) and IBC (International Building Code- 'international' because a few Caribbean islands likely use it too).

The differences between the two are significant and sometimes quite strategic for basic design layouts. Architects often have to coalesce the two, particularly in commercial projects with significant hazards or life safety considerations.

NFPA has an adjunct standard NFPA 5000 that tries to be what the IBC is. Conversely, IBC has the International Fire Code that tries to cover what NFPA 1 covers. NFPA has hundreds of different standards, ranging from the NFPA 1 to NFPA 10 (fire extinguishers) NFPA 13 (sprinklers) to NFPA 70 (National Electric Code) to NFPA 72 (fire alarm) to NFPA 101 (life safety) to NFPA 5000. There are many many others, often quite detailed.

Going back to the IBC, it is a multi-volume monstrosity, and world's apart from, say Italian building codes ("Guide Normativa per il Progettista"). The latter is a single 714 page volume; the former is at least 12 volumes, likely totaling 12,000 pages if not more.

On my reference shelf I have 4 different reference manuals by four different associations and agencies that treat reinforced concrete and masonry.

The "standards industry" (or technocratic industry) is itself an loose group of innumerable societies, groups, associations. There is no international committee that rules over these. Even ASTM and UL have their 'competitors'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2016 4:19 pm   Post subject: MCCANN CASE   

OT, but The Daily Mail
- Portuguese detective wins his libel appeal against Madeleine McCann's parents.
- Does not have to pay 500,000 Euro libel award against him.

Decision posted on his support website Goncalo Amaral
Quote:
3.In effect, and independently of the reasons invoked by the appellant for the publication, it is hardly understandable that an employee, even more a retired one, would have to keep said duties of secrecy and reserve, thus being limited in the exercise of his right to an opinion, concerning the interpretation of facts that were already made public by the judiciary authority, and widely debated (in fact, largely by initiative of the intervenients themselves) in the national and international media.

4. From the above mentioned, it is agreed, in accordance with both appeals, to revoke the appealed decision and, considering the action against them to be unfounded, to acquit the appealing plaintiffs of the totality of the requests. The costs, in both instances [courts] are to be paid by the appealed subjects [Kate and Gerry McCann].
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The 'Mignini' of Portugal :)
Top Profile 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 11:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
The 'Mignini' of Portugal :)


I'm just asking (not saying, because I don't know, I haven't followed the case in any detail) but wasn't Amaral a policeman/investigator rather than a prosecuting magistrate?
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sallyoo wrote:
max wrote:
The 'Mignini' of Portugal :)

I'm just asking (not saying, because I don't know, I haven't followed the case in any detail) but wasn't Amaral a policeman/investigator rather than a prosecuting magistrate?

Yes, but like Mignini he was battling with foreign involvement and a huge PR campaign in a what should have been simple case ...if you follow the evidence. Anyway, I have no hope that the truth will ever come out in that case, but at least it is good that Amaral is allowed to share his opinion. The case files are public anyway so I don't really understand what was the big deal in the first place.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 4:38 am   Post subject: MCCANN CASE BOOK   

The litigious McCanns have now threatened legal consequences for 'anyone selling the book in the UK', but his publisher has announced it will be reprinted now the legal hurdles have been removed. Already published in Portuguese, Italian and French, a free English translation of Maddie, The Truth Of The Lie is available here.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

olleosnep wrote:
"International standards" is a fallacy all by itself. Apart from ISO standards there are no other truly 'international standards' that have worldwide application or relevance.

XXIX.28 (Post 130570, on 20 April 2016)




Reading further on crime scene examination, each of these topics has a “Jurisdictions differ” tag applied to it:

Who coordinates everything, and how
How to secure the scene
How to organise the scene
What to record, and how
Who has access
What they wear
What they do
What sequence they do it in
How they record
How they collect
What they record and collect
What instruments to use
Who handles collected samples
How to package, label and transport samples
When and where to change clothes, and how often
How the presence of a substance should be determined
How the result of a test should be reported
When and how to clean equipment
What to do with used and unused reagents and other chemicals
Etc etc.


There is no international standard.

There is not even a national standard, in countries where there is more than one jurisdiction involved.


Result and conclusion: if you write or read a script involving detectives and forensics, or watch a show, you can tell what jurisdiction it relates to (if true-to-life) or that it is fictitious.
Top Profile 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 8:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
The 'Mignini' of Portugal :)


A bit more like the Mark Fuhrman of Portugal, except for having a thing against British people rather than black people and having a weird conviction that there are no paedophiles in Portugal.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 9:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Oh, did he supposedly plant evidence or show any example of bias against all British people, hugo? Not sure where he said there were "no paedophiles in Portugal" but at least the Portuguese did try and convict several prominent people in the Casa Pio case
Quote:
Guilty after six-year trial, Portugal's high-society paedophile ring
Politicians among abusers who preyed on state-run orphanages
By Jerome Taylor |Friday 3 September 2010

Unlike in the UK, where it seems the paedophile networks are investigated only after people are dead, senile, or otherwise unable to stand trial :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 10:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I really would like hugo to withdraw his post likening Mignini to Mark Furhman.

Maybe hugo justs want to drum up traffic for this site, (given that the morbid fascination of watching people tear each other apart on .org is pretty irresistible) but this isn't the way to do it. Not IMO, just fact. It is malicious (if intended) or simply mistakenly mischievous (in which case it needs to be rethought, and deleted).
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 12:58 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Um, hugo was comparing Portuguese police inspector Gonçalo Amaral to Mark Fuhrman, Sallyoo. While I disagree with his assessment, he's welcome to it, especially delicious because GA just won against the child abandoner, er, sainted McCanns which is reply enough :)

Disclosure: I was one of the Online trolls who helped him raise the funds to mount his successful appeal. Being imbued with the spirit of fair play, the McCanns had his assets frozen so he couldn't even afford to defend himself. Karma.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 12:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ah well, I apologise to Hugo if there was no comparison of Mignini with Furhman involved.

However I simply cannot understand this idea that a European country's law enforcers are remotely prejudiced against white middle class foreigners from 'first world countries'. They simply aren't.

Unfortunately the 'black man found black man guilty', (a philosophy often extended to 'east europeans' and 'south americans'), is found too often in western Europe - but this a completely different issue, with no relevance whatsoever to the McCann investigation, nor to the arrest and conviction of Knox and Sollecito.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 2:44 pm   Post subject: ECtHR   

Speaking of which, the Sunday Express headline
Maddie libel battle to go to Human Rights Court

is misleading. The McCann's lawyer only said it 'may' go to ECtHR, a concession they might lose at the Supreme Court level as well.

Still, moving on, I checked with ECtHR. No indication that Knox V. Italy application number 76577/13 has been accepted yet. According to Italy Press Profile
Applications pending before the court on 01/01/2016
Total pending applications* (inc. where paperwork not completed)
8292
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 2:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

It is a strange world at the moment. Is there even such a thing as an 'n word' to insult the British? :) There were indications of pedophiles very close to poor Madeleine. They weren't Portuguese though.

Quote:
I was seated between Dave and Gerry who I believe were both speaking about Madeleine. I don't remember the conversation in its entirety, but it seemed they were discussing a possible scenario. I remember Dave telling Gerry something like "she", referring to Madeleine, "would do this".

When he mentioned "this", Dave was sucking on one of his fingers, pushing it inside and outside his mouth, while with the other hand he made a circle around his nipple, in a circulatory movement over his clothes. This was done in a provocative manner and carried an explicit insinuation in relation to what he was saying and doing.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id236.html

Anyway, it interesting to see what is going on at the moment. The McCann's seem to be panicking, threatening those 'sick Brit trolls' or any 'trolls' who don't believe them I am sure.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... ction.html

Another more recent case similar to the McCann case is about the missing Deorr Kunz Jr. Again it is the parents who make up a rather unbelievable and impossible story about their missing son. The difference is there is no foreign politics that is involved, no 10+ dog alerts or any evidence, and the police have been rather outspoken that they think the parents are lying. They did not pass their lie detector tests. I am sure the parents have supporters that claim there is a worldwide conspiracy of police using those lousy lie detectors that always get it wrong. For now, the parents are not telling, and the kid hasn't been found.

Somehow it is almost always the parents or someone close to the family. I don't think these numbers have changed much or are all that much different for other countries. Yet killer parents like the McCann's or Ramsey's, and probably the Kunz family always easily get a bunch of supporters. I guess it has always been a strange world :)

Quote:
Children under the age of 5 in the United States are more likely to be killed by their parents than anyone else. Contrary to popular mythology, they are rarely killed by a sex-crazed stranger. FBI crime statistics show that in 1999 parents were responsible for 57 percent of these murders, with family friends and acquaintances accounting for another 30 percent and other family members accounting for 8 percent.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... _kill.html
Top Profile 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 6:07 pm   Post subject: Re: MCCANN CASE BOOK   

Ergon wrote:
The litigious McCanns have now threatened legal consequences for 'anyone selling the book in the UK', but his publisher has announced it will be reprinted now the legal hurdles have been removed. Already published in Portuguese, Italian and French, a free English translation of Maddie, The Truth Of The Lie is available here.



This would be the Gonçalo Amaral who got taken off the McCann case by his own superiors, and whose wife complained that when he left the force no one turned up to say goodbye.

He was also convicted of falsifying records in this case

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Joana_Cipriano

Leonor Cipriano retracted her confession the day after making it, claiming she had been beaten. She suffered extensive bruising to her face and body, which the police said was caused by her throwing herself down some stairs in the police station in an effort to kill herself.[3] Five officers, including Gonçalo Amaral, head of the regional Polícia Judiciária in Portimão at the time, were charged with a number of offences. The indictment alleged that several of them had kicked her, hit her with a cardboard tube, put a plastic bag over her head, and made her kneel on glass ashtrays.[5]

It was reported that Gonçalo Amaral made over 200.000 for the sale of his book, plus additional monies for the TV rights, so I guess he really needs any spare cash.

I believe that the judges classed the book as a 'literary work' and that he was entitled to an 'opinion'.


Have the anti McCann uncovered any actual evidence yet? I believe the Met spent a lot of time and money looking for some themselves. I'm sure they'd be interested.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 6:11 pm   Post subject: SIMILARITIES MCCANN AND KNOX CASES   

max, we don't know Payne was referring to Madeleine, but the Katarina Gaspar report about McCann friend David Payne was looked at, but as Amaral notes in his book, the Leicestershire police wrote "There is nothing incriminating in his past and, as we were able to verify, he has no criminal record". Pity we don't have copies of the Paynes rogatory statements to the police, but it always seemed one of the weaker elements of the story. Accusations of pedophilia (and also, the group were into spouse swapping) were never supported by the evidence.

But I find the coincidences between this case and Meredith Kercher's intriguing.

- 2007
- Xenophobic comments about Italy/Portugal's 'primitive' judicial system.
- Political interference.
- Million dollar PR campaigns.
- Dedicated volunteers translate the files into English to present the case to the world. They get harassed by PR agents and media influenced zombies.
- Fudging the DNA/forensic evidence.

Sad, really. Justice wasn't served in either case..
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: MCCANN CASE BOOK   

intray wrote:
Ergon wrote:
The litigious McCanns have now threatened legal consequences for 'anyone selling the book in the UK', but his publisher has announced it will be reprinted now the legal hurdles have been removed. Already published in Portuguese, Italian and French, a free English translation of Maddie, The Truth Of The Lie is available here.



This would be the Gonçalo Amaral who got taken off the McCann case by his own superiors, and whose wife complained that when he left the force no one turned up to say goodbye.

He was also convicted of falsifying records in this case

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Joana_Cipriano

Leonor Cipriano retracted her confession the day after making it, claiming she had been beaten. She suffered extensive bruising to her face and body, which the police said was caused by her throwing herself down some stairs in the police station in an effort to kill herself.[3] Five officers, including Gonçalo Amaral, head of the regional Polícia Judiciária in Portimão at the time, were charged with a number of offences. The indictment alleged that several of them had kicked her, hit her with a cardboard tube, put a plastic bag over her head, and made her kneel on glass ashtrays.[5]

It was reported that Gonçalo Amaral made over 200.000 for the sale of his book, plus additional monies for the TV rights, so I guess he really needs any spare cash.

I believe that the judges classed the book as a 'literary work' and that he was entitled to an 'opinion'.

Have the anti McCann uncovered any actual evidence yet? I believe the Met spent a lot of time and money looking for some themselves. I'm sure they'd be interested.


Hi, intray.

Amaral was 'taken off the case' after the Foreign Office intervened. It was a political decision, and I don't see why we should accept that to be the case in Italy and not Portugal.

Re the Murder of Joana Cipriano, her mother and uncle were convicted of murder, even though a body was never found (like Madeleine). I'd take the police's word over hers at this stage, but whether Amaral covered up his colleagues actions is not germane to the case, any more than whether Knox got hit upside the head :)

Already pointed out that Amaral's assets were frozen so he couldn't even defend himself. If he made money off his book (like Kate did with hers) then more power him, just as if they could sue him for damages, so, too, can he them.

re your link, always interesting to see "slimvirgin" taking a hand editing Wikipedia entries. Seems to follow agendas and PR quite well, doesn't she?

re evidence,
- no evidence of a "break in" was found ((shades of la Knox )
- contradictory witness statements indicative of cover up (more la Knox :)
- police dogs alerted to blood/cadaverine in the apartment/rental car.

re the Met well they have no jurisdiction in Portugal and now that Amaral was removed looks like the 'investigation' will go no where, as if ever..

But nevertheless, a group of British police officers were so outraged at his treatment they donated a thousand pounds towards his defense, and maybe even, some from the Met :)


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 7:48 pm   Post subject: Re: MCCANN CASE BOOK   

Ergon wrote:
intray wrote:
Ergon wrote:
The litigious McCanns have now threatened legal consequences for 'anyone selling the book in the UK', but his publisher has announced it will be reprinted now the legal hurdles have been removed. Already published in Portuguese, Italian and French, a free English translation of Maddie, The Truth Of The Lie is available here.



This would be the Gonçalo Amaral who got taken off the McCann case by his own superiors, and whose wife complained that when he left the force no one turned up to say goodbye.

He was also convicted of falsifying records in this case

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Joana_Cipriano

Leonor Cipriano retracted her confession the day after making it, claiming she had been beaten. She suffered extensive bruising to her face and body, which the police said was caused by her throwing herself down some stairs in the police station in an effort to kill herself.[3] Five officers, including Gonçalo Amaral, head of the regional Polícia Judiciária in Portimão at the time, were charged with a number of offences. The indictment alleged that several of them had kicked her, hit her with a cardboard tube, put a plastic bag over her head, and made her kneel on glass ashtrays.[5]

It was reported that Gonçalo Amaral made over 200.000 for the sale of his book, plus additional monies for the TV rights, so I guess he really needs any spare cash.

I believe that the judges classed the book as a 'literary work' and that he was entitled to an 'opinion'.

Have the anti McCann uncovered any actual evidence yet? I believe the Met spent a lot of time and money looking for some themselves. I'm sure they'd be interested.


Hi, intray.

Amaral was 'taken off the case' after the Foreign Office intervened. It was a political decision, and I don't see why we should accept that to be the case in Italy and not Portugal.

Re the Murder of Joana Cipriano, her mother and uncle were convicted of murder, even though a body was never found (like Madeleine). I'd take the police's word over hers at this stage, but whether Amaral covered up his colleagues actions is not germane to the case, any more than whether Knox got hit upside the head :)

Already pointed out that Amaral's assets were frozen so he couldn't even defend himself. If he made money off his book (like Kate did with hers) then more power him, just as if they could sue him for damages, so, too, can he them.

re your link, always interesting to see "slimvirgin" taking a hand editing Wikipedia entries. Seems to follow agendas and PR quite well, doesn't she?

re evidence,
- no evidence of a "break in" was found ((shades of la Knox )
- contradictory witness statements indicative of cover up (more la Knox :)
- police dogs alerted to blood/cadaverine in the apartment/rental car.

re the Met well they have no jurisdiction in Portugal and now that Amaral was removed looks like the 'investigation' will go no where, as if ever..

But nevertheless, a group of British police officers were so outraged at his treatment they donated a thousand pounds towards his defense, and maybe even, some from the Met :)



Hi Ergon. I'm sure Craig is just as reliable as Slim Virgin, although I would assume that you're not questioning the basic facts. They're not that relevant to the McCann case except for the falsification conviction.

Seriously though, do you not think it odd that the Met have spent all that time and found nothing, yet a group of internet posters have got the case wrapped up?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 8:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi, intray.

The case (and PMF) is more than just 'the basic facts'. I noted similarities between their case and ours.

I can't speak for why the Met found 'nothing', but your interesting comment "a group of internet posters have got the case wrapped up" no more applies to them than it applies to us.

The conclusions about the McCann case were made by trained investigators, as in the Meredith Kercher case, and if some of us agree with them, so be it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 8:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

No-one has got the case wrapped up not even the Portuguese investigators; Madeleine is still missing.

The internet posters are only speculating.

The Met investigation runs to over £10m.

Their failure to solve the murder doesn't surprise me.

They published these mug shots & failed to see their resemblance to GM.

They've ignored the evidence of the sniffer dogs, KM's refusal to answer 40 questions etc etc

_________________
The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.- Michael Rivero
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Hi, intray.

The case (and PMF) is more than just 'the basic facts'. I noted similarities between their case and ours.

I can't speak for why the Met found 'nothing', but your interesting comment "a group of internet posters have got the case wrapped up" no more applies to them than it applies to us.

The conclusions about the McCann case were made by trained investigators, as in the Meredith Kercher case, and if some of us agree with them, so be it.



In Meredith's case, there was a lot of solid evidence. The case went to trial and the parties were found guilty. I do not see any real parallels except for the use of PR by the McCanns and by Knox.
The Portugal scene was badly mishandled , so it is not that surprising that no real physical evidence exists, however absence of evidence does not translate to proof of guilt. The dogs and DNA have been discussed. Some people think it significant, the MET obviously did not share that view. Eye witness testimony can be suspect at the best of times, and sketches are not evidence.
Stranger crime can be very difficult for investigators, especially in a tourist area, so the fact that no person has been brought to book leaves a lot of room for speculation.
The police should investigate anyone and everyone. They will be given all sorts of information, sometimes in confidence, sometimes with malicious intent. Writing books and leaking details to selected reporters is not appropiate conduct for a responsible officer.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 10:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Well, here's a list of things the Met and the Portuguese judicaria did NOT investigate after Amaral (including getting Kate McCann to answer the 48 questions) Investigate the incinerated body thesis

Oh and DNA specialist Peter Gill did a better job replying to the DNA evidence against Sollecito than John Lowe of the FSS did in saying why the DNA evidence in the car was 'inconclusive'. Didn't say how or why, though they both used the mixed DNA profiles to make unwarranted assertions. 15 out of 19 matches on the bra clasp are conclusive but in the car boot are not why?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:21 am   Post subject: Re: SIMILARITIES MCCANN AND KNOX CASES   

Ergon wrote:
max, we don't know Payne was referring to Madeleine, but the Katarina Gaspar report about McCann friend David Payne was looked at, but as Amaral notes in his book, the Leicestershire police wrote "There is nothing incriminating in his past and, as we were able to verify, he has no criminal record". Pity we don't have copies of the Paynes rogatory statements to the police, but it always seemed one of the weaker elements of the story. Accusations of pedophilia (and also, the group were into spouse swapping) were never supported by the evidence.

But I find the coincidences between this case and Meredith Kercher's intriguing.

- 2007
- Xenophobic comments about Italy/Portugal's 'primitive' judicial system.
- Political interference.
- Million dollar PR campaigns.
- Dedicated volunteers translate the files into English to present the case to the world. They get harassed by PR agents and media influenced zombies.
- Fudging the DNA/forensic evidence.

Sad, really. Justice wasn't served in either case..

Katarina Gaspar thought they were talking about Madeleine, and later he did it again talking about his own daughter I believe. Imagine somebody talking like that about your own child. I don't think it is normal. She kept an eye on him all times and wouldn't let him near her children. They were worried enough to file a police report when Madeleine went missing. You don't do that just for fun. Then the Leicester police waited 6 months before sending it to the Portuguese. It is crazy. Anyway, it is not conclusive evidence but it is more 'evidence' then there is of any intruder.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I am not so sure the MET (or SY) thinks the dog results are not significant. I saw pictures of SY searching for Madeleine with sniffer dogs so I am sure they know how accurate they are. It is all become political IMO and then the truth goes out the window. Why can there be a program about a professional rock climber running up Filomena's window, but they can't even make an investigative program that explains the works of sniffer dogs? Just invite a few police and dog handlers, explain how the training works, how accurate a dog has to be before he is even allowed to become a police dog, and then get into the details and statistics applied to the situation in the McCann's apartment. Invite Martin Grime. It is not that difficult.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:03 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
I am not so sure the MET (or SY) thinks the dog results are not significant. I saw pictures of SY searching for Madeleine with sniffer dogs so I am sure they know how accurate they are. It is all become political IMO and then the truth goes out the window. Why can there be a program about a professional rock climber running up Filomena's window, but they can't even make an investigative program that explains the works of sniffer dogs? Just invite a few police and dog handlers, explain how the training works, how accurate a dog has to be before he is even allowed to become a police dog, and then get into the details and statistics applied to the situation in the McCann's apartment. Invite Martin Grime. It is not that difficult.


Like this, max? :)

Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:05 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Or this? :)

Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Cool videos. They can use it for a Porta a Porta type of show. Have a bit of discussion about the whole thing with people who know what they are talking about. Not the one where they had the professional rock climber doing a double flick flack and then saying how easy it was...lol. Anyway, it is not going to happen.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

There’s a 1951 Italian comedy, Era lui... sì! sì! (“It was him!... Yes! Yes!”), notable nowadays for having a young Sophia Loren playing an odalisca.

It’s about a department store owner, nightmares, a business school graduate who looks uncannily like his nightmare figure, and the psychoanalyst’s advice about facing reality.

The title has echoes of Amanda’s accusation (“It was him!”).

It ends happily, though, like all comedies: with a boot up the backside, a marriage, all the usual.

“Ora, finalmente, gli incubi potranno essere solo un brutto ricordo.”
(Now, finally, the nightmares can become just a bad memory.)
[w.it]

All probably just a coincidence, although the cause(s) of Amanda's "flashbacks" haven't received an explanation yet.
Top Profile 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 8:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

@Machiavelli_Aki has tweeted the sentence, issued last week, in a civil case brought against Pascali, Vechiotti (and another dottore).

The three of them were found guilty of negligence, and grave professional misconduct, and ordered to pay damages and all costs.

The case under consideration arose from the forensic 'investigations' into the Olgiata case, (here is a link to a brief history of that case) http://www.nottecriminale.it/delitto-de ... ssino.html

In January this year another case, dating back to 1975, was reopened. This grisly one involves more than one exhumation of a cadaver, at one point identified by Vecchiotti. (She was, coincidentally, the pupil of the aunt of the cadaver, if her identification was correct.) Here's a link to the most recent story I could find; the results of the 2016 exhumation are a bit overdue. http://www.cronaca-nera.it/4496/andrea- ... se-sapremo

Sorry the links are a bit tabloidy, the story is well covered in the more mainstream press as well.

It would be good to see the sentence tweeted by Machiavelli in a more easily readable form than Twitter manages - perhaps he's able to provide a .pdf for this site?
Top Profile 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 10:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Apologies for the inordinate length and uneven formatting.


Let's start with the doggies.


'The U.K. has also approximately six Police dog teams that have been trained
exclusively on decomposing pig remains not for human consumption as
specialist dogs to work off the leash to locate human remains in a wider
variety of scenarios. Pig is used as it has been proven in training and
operationally over the last 20 years to be a reliable analogue for human
remains detecting training for dogs. The possession of human remains for the
purpose of training dogs in the U.K. is not acceptable at this point in time.'

Note..They are trained to detect dead pigs.

The FBI expert.

'In my role as advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated
assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States.
These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I
introduced decomposing pig cadavers into training assessments 100 % of the
animals alerted to the medium. (The products were obtained from whole piglet
cadaver not processed food for human consumption). The result from
scientific experiments and research to date is suggestive that the scent of
human and pig decomposing material is so similar that we are unable to 'train'
the dog to distinguish between the two.'

Note....The animals cannot distinguish between a dead human or a dead pig


Martin. The dog handler. Remember that name

'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated operationally or in training. In six years of

operational deployment in over 200 criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and specifically pork

foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal.

My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by

a change in behavior.'

So Martin reckons dead pigs never turn up on roadsides.




Martin earns £93,600

'Eddie the sniffer dog - the animal that had supposedly found the 'scent of death' in the Portuguese flat where Madeleine McCann

disappeared - no longer had a licence for UK police forensic work when Harper started using him in Jersey. Eddie, whose owner,

Martin Grime, was paid £93,600 for less than five months' work, triggered the first excavations by barking at a spot where

Harper's team then unearthed what was claimed to be part of a child's skull. In fact, as a Kew Gardens expert has now confirmed,

it was a piece of coconut shell. '

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... mbles.html


Oh dear....... Eddie made a slight mistake there.





Let's consider a moment. Two senior Police officers have lost their jobs because they bet the farm on Martin's dog. I wonder if he's still getting work? He let his licence lapse though, so I guess the shine went off that particular star.


Still Martin did explain a few things.




Quote

'The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to

secure evidence and locate human remains or Human blood.

The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog alert indications MUST be corroborated if to

establish their findings as evidence.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only alert indications that may become corroborated are

those that the CSI dog indicated by forensic laboratory analysis.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is cadaver scent

contaminant.
This does not however suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a number of given scenarios and

in any event no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with

corroborating evidence.
Vol IX p. 2478
CADAVER AND HUMAN BLOOD DETECTING DOGS'




So that's fair enough....No corroborating evidence means the smell of dead pig can not be relied upon.



Then Martin says something else, on a video. Not verbatim.
Because the flat is not ventilated the scent may concentrate here, but this may not be the actual place.'



I take that as saying that the pig scent can be carried from elsewhere and can concentrate in an unventilated area. There's a restaurant about fifty metes away, but I bet they haven't got any dead pigs either.



Hey, the dogs are barking like crazy and I'll bet Martin's excited too. All that cash, plus expenses. All we need is some forensic corroborating evidence, that'll be a cert, Martin's dog never lies. It's time for Inspector Clouseau to leak it to the press. Media interest becomes intense, thousands of internet experts can develop really plausible theories.



Quote.

In that sense, forensic examinations were performed in the areas and on the objects that were marked and signalled by the blood

dog, especially in a credentialed British lab (Forensic Science Service - cf. Appendixes I and VII – FSS Final Report), and also,

some of them, at the National Institute for Legal Medicine (cf. Appendix I), whose final results failed to corroborate the canine

markings, that is to say that cellular material was collected, which was nevertheless not identified as belonging to a specific

person, and it was not even possible to establish said material’s quality (namely if it could be blood or another type of bodily

fluid).

in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4628-4636 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)

Quote

An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and

showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result

match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive, it is not

possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.

There is no evidence to support the view that Madeline McCann contributed DNA to the swab 3B

A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material

recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20

DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeline has inherited the

same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19

components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because

there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contnbutors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex

for meaningful interpretation/conclusion.

in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4628-4636 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch




Stop! hold it there! There was no corroborating evidence! Surely not! Martin's dog can detect a coconut at fifty metres.

Ah well, time to get rid of Inspector Clouseau.




Quote

'This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim’s

life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim’s behalf. In the case of the files and facing the

elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not

foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in

danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of

the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.

The parents didn’t even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the

previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of

the children that were in their respective apartments.

Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during

more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect,

we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty – the disappearance of Madeleine – due to their lack of

caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.

Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of

probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of

sustaining elements in the files.

The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective

circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said

disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis

and also from the forensics’ conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.

To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or

consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed,

the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed

email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.

Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child’s death, it would still

have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her

body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May,

had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the ‘Ocean Club’ resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the

surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or

contacts in Portugal."


in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4639-4645 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)




That's the Portuguese Prosecutor saying that all the allegations were unfounded. There was no real evidence.
For £10 million, the London Met arrived at the same conclusion


So an innocent women is slandered by an incompetent police officer and a cult like lynch mob continues to hound a tortured family. All because Martin's dog caught a whiff of dead pig!


CODA.

- The obliging cooperation and commitment of Police forces from many Countries, with a very special mention for the British

police entities, was counted upon;

- Tests and analyses were performed in two of the most prestigious and credentialed institutions for this effect – the National

Institute for Legal Medicine and the British lab Forensic Science Service -, whose final results did not positively value the

collected residues, or corroborated the canine markings;

- Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of

the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest

conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in

a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor

even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still

alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.

But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is

requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine

McCann – apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment – or to hold anyone responsible over its

authorship.


Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4645-4649 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sorry, but that is hard to read. What is the point really? There was a dead bleeding pig behind the sofa? When have dead pigs ever been an issue or does it only apply to the McCann case for some reason? Where are all the examples of police dogs finding dead pigs? There is not even one example, but instead you come up with the old joke about the coconut. Where is the evidence a coconut smells anything like a dead body or a dead pig? Dogs don't alert to coconuts. It is really silly to suggest it.

So the dogs were never wrong before in 200 cases but now suddenly 10+ times in a row. What are the chances? Why not assume the dog handler and his dogs were just doing their job instead of launching these unfounded attacks. This is how the FOA attacks Stefanoni and how they try to explain away the Luminol hits. Yeah, you might need more evidence in a Portuguese court but the Luminol hits in the Kercher case or dog alerts in the McCann case give you a pretty good idea what happened and who was involved. They never did rub any fruit juice on their feet, and there never were any dead bleeding pigs in only the McCann apartment and only their rental car and nowhere else. Common sense.
Top Profile 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
Sorry, but that is hard to read. What is the point really? There was a dead bleeding pig behind the sofa? When have dead pigs ever been an issue or does it only apply to the McCann case for some reason? Where are all the examples of police dogs finding dead pigs? There is not even one example, but instead you come up with the old joke about the coconut. Where is the evidence a coconut smells anything like a dead body or a dead pig? Dogs don't alert to coconuts. It is really silly to suggest it.

So the dogs were never wrong before in 200 cases but now suddenly 10+ times in a row. What are the chances? Why not assume the dog handler and his dogs were just doing their job instead of launching these unfounded attacks. This is how the FOA attacks Stefanoni and how they try to explain away the Luminol hits. Yeah, you might need more evidence in a Portuguese court but the Luminol hits in the Kercher case or dog alerts in the McCann case give you a pretty good idea what happened and who was involved. They never did rub any fruit juice on their feet, and there never were any dead bleeding pigs in only the McCann apartment and only their rental car and nowhere else. Common sense.




It is difficult to read, especially the translations. The point was that the animal was trained to respond to the smell from a dead animal, a pig. Even if it were trained on dead humans as in America, the dog cannot tell the difference.
In Portugal, a hot country, where meat will decay quickly, pork is fairly commonplace. Thus the dead pig reference.

If you wish to fairly convict someone the evidence must be clear and accurate. The dog, as it was trained to do, indicated that it could smell dead flesh. The handler himself states that this is not enough to be of value. If there is no actual dead body there must be swabs or samples which will prove that a dead body was present, otherwise the dog could have been misled by another scent.

DNA samples will not actually prove that a body was dead, and low copy DNA found in a family environment can be pretty useless.
In this case the lab found that there were five sources for a McCann DNA sample, so they could not say that the DNA belonged to the missing child.

Without any physical samples the dog barking was of no value so the main allegation against the McCanns collapsed. Even if there had been DNA it would have been a very tenuous link given that the car had contained shared family possessions.

The other Portuguese police did a reasonably thorough job. They accessed phone data, CCTV cameras and interviewed numerous people.
They state that they found no evidence of any sort, they could not even discover if the child was alive or dead.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:39 pm   Post subject: Re: EDDIE AND KEELA   

intray, from your link:

- Cadaver detecting Eddie's license wasn't renewed when PC Grime retired.
- Blood sniffing Keela's license expired two weeks after he arrived in New Jersey.

Did they suddenly lose their highly trained skills?
Anyways, the article is a critique of DCO Lenny Harper, not the dogs.

You ought to know police dogs in the UK are not allowed to train on human remains, hence the 'pig carcasses' The Telegraph

Therefore what one FBI consultant has to say is irrelevant. Especially as the FBI did request Eddie and Keela's assistance (see below).

No one's seeking to 'try the McCanns' since they clean got away with whatever they did. Expressing our opinions here, as you are, protesting "a cult like lynch mob continues to hound a tortured family. All because Martin's dog caught a whiff of dead pig!". Not to forget the coconut, of course, ahem.. Eddie alerts to the smell of cadaver, not coconut, just for the record..

It was the UK that demanded they be brought in the first place: Eddie and Keela (some of the links are dead).
Quote:
Maddie hunt: Send in dogs-The Sun
By Ian Hepburn and John Askill
Published: 23 May 2007
A senior UK police source said: "It is an absolute scandal, time is fast running out for this little girl.
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."

Now they implicated the McCanns, they are no longer reliable?

Except, of course, when they are.
Belfast Telegraph
Quote:
Spaniel used in Ulster murder hunts flies in
By Brendan McDaid Published 08/08/2007
The sniffer dog who found the body of murdered Ulsterwoman Attracta Harron has been flown to Portugal in the hunt for the body of Madeleine McCann, the Belfast Telegraph can reveal.
Used across the world for his accuracy, seven-year-old hound Eddie helped police put Trevor Hamilton behind bars in 2006 after the victim recovery dog found 63-year- old Attracta Harron's blood on the 23-year-old murderer's burned-out Hyundai.
Eddie, who works for South Yorkshire police, also located Attracta's body in a shallow grave in April 2003.
Last year the dog and his handlers returned to Ulster for a third time to help find missing Arlene Arkinson.
The Tyrone teenager went missing after leaving a disco in Bundoran, Co Donegal, on August 13, 1994. Both Eddie and Keela have also been used in various disappearance and murder cases in the US and the Republic of Ireland.

Then, to be fair, in the Eugene Zapata case where the dogs were brought in by the FBI and local sheriff's office and located blood and cadaver, the judge dismissed the charges against Eugene Zapata of murdering his wife, Jeanette Louise Zapata, noting no body had been found, and the defense submission that the dogs were "too unreliable". This led to Gerry McCann consulting with Zapata's attorneys Daily Mail

Then Eugene Zapata confessed to murdering his wife in an argument, thus confirming the dog's accuracy, LOL. (He was sentenced to the maximum of 5 years in prison for reckless homicide).

Beyond that, that "the police checked CCTV and phone records" (no CCTV of Maddie being carried away, the McCanns deleted their phone records).

Anyhow, a great deal of special pleading only on behalf of the McCanns. I don't see where you contributed one substantive comment about Meredith Kercher.

Have a nice day.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The expert explained how the dogs ignored pork in the waste basket. The areas where he alerted have nothing to do with a dead pig and pigs don't bleed human blood. They don't kill pigs in restaurants either and the theory that the scent came flying over from a nearby restaurant is laughable. Every time this case comes up the theories get sillier. Last time even the FBI was in it, and the handler was made out for a criminal that lied about those 200 cases without any evidence to back that up. Now he was just in it for the money? I don't understand the need for these attacks. He never said that the alerts are of no value. They are of the same value as the Luminol hits. The alerts are not random. They tell the story of what happened and how the body was hidden and moved. Nobody was hiding and moving a dead pig. I can't believe I am discussing this...lol.
Top Profile 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi Ergon

As John Cleese said to the German tourists 'You started it'. You posted the cover of Inspector Gadgets book. Furthermore you cannot make a series of baseless assertions and expect them to be unchallenged. There is no evidence. The professional people involved in the case have accepted that, with the exception, of course, of an individual who has an axe to grind.

Dogs are a valuable aid to detection, period. If they do not discover something physical their job has finished. Three hundred instances of successful discovery have no bearing on a case with a negative outcome.

Data held by phone companies cannot be deleted, the geographical location can be ascertained, the person called can be recorded. The cell phones of that era were fairly basic so I doubt that there much to be deleted on the actual handset.

Numerous professional investigators have looked at that case. Every one of them would have been delighted to have found something, but the result is zero.

What the McCann critics have is suspicion, and they have in in spades. There is nothing wrong with suspicion, but it can become obsessive, crowding out other possibilities. Have you ever considered that you may be wrong? If you were, would you feel ok with the vitriol which is directed towards the family?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
The expert explained how the dogs ignored pork in the waste basket. The areas where he alerted have nothing to do with a dead pig and pigs don't bleed human blood. They don't kill pigs in restaurants either and the theory that the scent came flying over from a nearby restaurant is laughable. Every time this case comes up the theories get sillier. Last time even the FBI was in it, and the handler was made out for a criminal that lied about those 200 cases without any evidence to back that up. Now he was just in it for the money? I don't understand the need for these attacks. He never said that the alerts are of no value. They are of the same value as the Luminol hits. The alerts are not random. They tell the story of what happened and how the body was hidden and moved. Nobody was hiding and moving a dead pig. I can't believe I am discussing this...lol.


Hi Max.

What the dogs are sniffing is decaying flesh. They're trained on pigs/humans and they can not tell the difference. Any fridge or bin may well have traces of such odours.

Luminol is more conclusive as an indicator. It can detect pattern, splatter, footprints, etc. A dog can only indicate.

Guns for hire are fairly common in criminal defence. Professional people are prepared to steer their opinion for a fee. I'm not accusing the dog handler of that, he seemed reasonably straightforward, but it can be a factor.

Because there was no physical discovery linked to the dog's alerts they are essentially meaningless, so there is no story, only suspicion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

So the dogs' reactions are based on Porky Pies? *ignores boos and dodges hurled fruit* :mrgreen:

It's crazy how such anomalies abound in such cases and that this seems to be their commonality, innit? The dogs may have smelled piggies, while the cop was incompetent, while the DNA traces can't be really relied upon, while there's innocent explanations for the McCanns not-quite-right-but-can't-put-my-finger-on-it-why behaviour.

And with Knox, contamination occurred, combined with stunning flaws, combined with coincidental knowledge, combined with all the witnesses being wrong combined with coercion, combined with false memory syndrome combined with international media pressure (and of course those international standards too, heaven forbid we forget those) and a creepy prosecutor who nonetheless did a bang up job prosecuting the Scary Black Guy.

And with those poor railroaded WM3, we had Satanic Panic combined with two juries being wrong, combined with coercion, combined with innocent coincidences for Echols' detailed Knowledge and innocent explanations for his lies as to how he knew these details, and what's more, in all three cases (and did I mention Innocent and like totally framed Steven Avery and his equally innocent and totally like, coerced and stuff accomplice, oops I mean fellow erm, railroadee Brendan Massey?), all of these anomalies occurred in complete symmetry and parallel to each other! In each goddamn case, I mean what are the odds, eh? wtf)

This is a phenomenon that should clearly be investigated by statiticians and erm numerologists and proponents of that Bayesian probability thingie because the more innocent you are, the more unlucky you seem to be, and the more those pesky anomalies and coincidences just pop right up. I mean if I were a raging cynic, I'd prolly think that the only alternative explanation is that they're y'know, guilty... is)

Anyway, I'm off to get Heather Mack out. There's no evidence that she's innocent... but we can't rule it out! pp-(

Wish me luck!
hugz-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 2:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
So the dogs' reactions are based on Porky Pies? *ignores boos and dodges hurled fruit* :mrgreen:

It's crazy how such anomalies abound in such cases and that this seems to be their commonality, innit? The dogs may have smelled piggies, while the cop was incompetent, while the DNA traces can't be really relied upon, while there's innocent explanations for the McCanns not-quite-right-but-can't-put-my-finger-on-it-why behaviour.

And with Knox, contamination occurred, combined with stunning flaws, combined with coincidental knowledge, combined with all the witnesses being wrong combined with coercion, combined with false memory syndrome combined with international media pressure (and of course those international standards too, heaven forbid we forget those) and a creepy prosecutor who nonetheless did a bang up job prosecuting the Scary Black Guy.

And with those poor railroaded WM3, we had Satanic Panic combined with two juries being wrong, combined with coercion, combined with innocent coincidences for Echols' detailed Knowledge and innocent explanations for his lies as to how he knew these details, and what's more, in all three cases (and did I mention Innocent and like totally framed Steven Avery and his equally innocent and totally like, coerced and stuff accomplice, oops I mean fellow erm, railroadee Brendan Massey?), all of these anomalies occurred in complete symmetry and parallel to each other! In each goddamn case, I mean what are the odds, eh? wtf)

This is a phenomenon that should clearly be investigated by statiticians and erm numerologists and proponents of that Bayesian probability thingie because the more innocent you are, the more unlucky you seem to be, and the more those pesky anomalies and coincidences just pop right up. I mean if I were a raging cynic, I'd prolly think that the only alternative explanation is that they're y'know, guilty... is)

Anyway, I'm off to get Heather Mack out. There's no evidence that she's innocent... but we can't rule it out! pp-(

Wish me luck!
hugz-)




I will not post any more on the McCann case, I will be busy elsewhere for a while and there is not a lot more to be said.
The Perugia 3 were rightfully convicted and it is unfortunate that they were released prematurely, likewise the WM3, the Avery2 and any other cases that journalists and PR agencies decide to promote. It is a common technique for lawyers to
plead contamination, so good investigators make sure that their evidence is lawyer proof. That is how the system works now and the best way to beat it is to be professional.

You did the 'Porky pies' I did 'Leading the witness' A little humour can be a useful antidote to anger and it is better for us all to keep our cool.

Regards to Ergon. Keep up the good work.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I'm cool mate and was to a degree, actually taking the pi... joshing about. ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi, intray, regards to you too. Thank you, I will.

Re the 'baseless allegations', ahem. One could equally argue, FOA like, the cops had no reason to suspect Kanox, Soullesscito or the McCanns on the basis of a staged break in. Or LCN DNA which be 'inconclusive' because of contamination/proximity/mixed profiles. Or which case' circumstantial evidence is more conclusive than the other, ahem. Or which professional investigators are more credible than the other, or which has an axe to grind/agenda to carry out. False arguments, IMHO.

Re the 'vitriol directed towards the family'. Comments and opinion about the likelihood of their involvement in a cover up of an accidental death are, I think, fair comment. Systems aren't perfect, nor are investigations. Either of us can be wrong, but I prefer my considered position, thanks.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:11 pm   Post subject: CIA RENDITIONS ITALY   

From The Daily Beast
Christopher Dickey/Barbie Nadeau April 26, 2016
Quote:
The CIA Kidnapper Facing Jail in Italy
The 2003 ‘rendition’ of Abu Omar from Italy’s streets to Egypt’s torture cells was a notorious CIA op. Will Sabrina De Sousa be jailed for it?

At the time of the kidnapping, De Sousa reportedly was working as a multi-lingual interpreter, and the Italian court claimed that she was instrumental in finalizing the arrangements for Abu Omar’s torture in Egypt. She was already in the United States in 2004 when the criminal case against her began.

The convictions of all the Americans were upheld by Italy’s highest court in 2012, although no one has ever served a day in prison for the crime. Nor has anyone yet paid Abu Omar €1 million ($1.13 million) and his wife half that sum for their suffering, as ordered by the Italian courts.

Paradoxically, the Italian criminal court eventually convicted Abu Omar on terrorist conspiracy charges from before his abduction, but that trial, too, was conducted in absentia. He was released from prison in Egypt, is reportedly still living there, and nobody expects he will be extradited.

The case has caused tensions between Italy and the United States over the years. In 2015, Italy’s President Sergio Mattarella pardoned two of the operatives, Castelli and the commander of the U.S. Air Force unit that flew Abu Omar out of Italy, and shortened the sentence of Lady ahead of Mattarella’s state visit to Washington. He also pardoned the Italian agents involved in the case. And, perhaps more importantly, Italy has never pushed for the extradition from the United States of any of the American operatives, a fact seen as a compromise gesture.

So, why now for De Sousa?

In 2015, De Sousa, a naturalized American who was born in India and who has a Portuguese passport (her family is from the former Portuguese colony of Goa), defied warnings by the U.S. State Department not to travel to Europe, where she could be picked up on a European arrest warrant and sent to Italy to serve the prison term.

It’s not like De Sousa didn’t know the risk. Indeed, in 2009 after the Italian conviction she filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, former Rome station chief Castelli, her former boss Robert Seldon Lady, the State Department, and then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, alleging that they had failed to protect a loyal public servant.

De Sousa told us in 2009 she was “saddened, dismayed, and angered that the government I served abandoned me completely and I am being punished for conduct I did not do.”
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sallyoo wrote:
@Machiavelli_Aki has tweeted the sentence, issued last week, in a civil case brought against Pascali, Vechiotti (and another dottore).

The three of them were found guilty of negligence, and grave professional misconduct, and ordered to pay damages and all costs.

The case under consideration arose from the forensic 'investigations' into the Olgiata case, (here is a link to a brief history of that case) http://www.nottecriminale.it/delitto-de ... ssino.html

In January this year another case, dating back to 1975, was reopened. This grisly one involves more than one exhumation of a cadaver, at one point identified by Vecchiotti. (She was, coincidentally, the pupil of the aunt of the cadaver, if her identification was correct.) Here's a link to the most recent story I could find; the results of the 2016 exhumation are a bit overdue. http://www.cronaca-nera.it/4496/andrea- ... se-sapremo

Sorry the links are a bit tabloidy, the story is well covered in the more mainstream press as well.

It would be good to see the sentence tweeted by Machiavelli in a more easily readable form than Twitter manages - perhaps he's able to provide a .pdf for this site?

Hello Sallyoo, now i read on PMF.org that Vecchiotti got hired as forensic expert in a murder case. How that after she got sentenced for grave professional misconduct? I think she got assignet by a PM, so not as private expert. How that? Can you pls. explain that to me? Is it regular, normal perhaps?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
Hi Max.

What the dogs are sniffing is decaying flesh. They're trained on pigs/humans and they can not tell the difference. Any fridge or bin may well have traces of such odours.

Luminol is more conclusive as an indicator. It can detect pattern, splatter, footprints, etc. A dog can only indicate.

Guns for hire are fairly common in criminal defence. Professional people are prepared to steer their opinion for a fee. I'm not accusing the dog handler of that, he seemed reasonably straightforward, but it can be a factor.

Because there was no physical discovery linked to the dog's alerts they are essentially meaningless, so there is no story, only suspicion.

Thanks. "pig remains not for human consumption". You posted the info yourself but now you keep acting like it could be any meat from the fridge or a bin. It doesn't work like that. It is meaningful to me if the alternatives make no sense and are statistically impossible. I read they are wrapping up the hoax search and hopefully they stop harassing Maddie look-a-like girls world-wide and waste tax payers money. I am not expecting any truth to come out ever, but who knows...things change...people change. I don't have a dog in that fight :)
Top Profile 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 10:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

pig-)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZGKNlI8zRQ hbc)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 11:56 am   Post subject: PAULO ANTONIO BRUNO CASSAZIONE   

Interesting news, Italy: Judge Paolo Bruno to be awarded compensation for being wrongfully charged with 'association with the mafia'.

Has now been nominated as President of the Corte di Casazione

WTF, etc. Not surprised.

ETA: Now appears to be for President of Section V, not the Court. The President of Cassazione since January 07, 2016 is Giovanni Canzio

No idea what happened to Marasca :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:05 pm   Post subject: LONDON JOHN   

On the other hand, concerning McCann, London John needs to get his facts right. One of the few remaining IIP who still seem obsessed with me, wrote a couple of days back I believe her parents murdered Madeleine McCann. Never said that, only that they covered up an accidental death.

The 'weather whisperer' was NOT pleased :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:36 pm   Post subject: Re: PAULO ANTONIO BRUNO CASSAZIONE   

Ergon wrote:
Interesting news, Italy: Judge Paolo Bruno to be awarded compensation for being wrongfully charged with 'association with the mafia'.

Has now been nominated as President of the Corte di Casazione

WTF, etc. Not surprised.


Business as usual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrado_Carnevale (although afaik, he's actually retired now).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline JohnQ


Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:41 am

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: the lying liar of ISF   

Jackie wrote:
I think I'd prefer a more balanced system designed to favor a discovery of the whole truth - An unlimited right to silence leaves too many questions unanswered. It's antithetical to the investigation and prevention of crime.

There's got to be a better way ... we simply cannot afford to hold justice for the accused more dear than justice for the victim - indeed, as the petition against RS and cases like OJ and Casey Anthony show, this slanted approach doesn't necessarily serve the accused particularly well either: silence in court and a sliver of DOUBT will not fully restore an accused in the eyes of his/her fellow citizens, only the full, unadulterated, unconditional TRUTH (tested in court by way of rigorous cross-examination) can do that.


I agree completely.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:59 am   Post subject: CLEMENCY FOR CRAIG CESAL   

Craig Cesal
Change Org petition requesting president Obama issue clemency for him. Life sentence for non-violent marijuana offense is inhumane.
Here's the organization helping him and others like him Marijuana Lifer Project
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:58 am   Post subject: MARASCA BRUNO UPDATES   

I am told that judge Marasca retired immediately after the MB report was issued, and Bruno is less than 2 years from retirement, being one of the oldest judges in Section V.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:03 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Maori in trouble....next....
http://www.ilmessaggero.it/primopiano/c ... 97425.html
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 10:56 pm   Post subject: KNOX FLICKS NETFLIX   

Apropos of nothing, but a Netflix documentary made in Denmark is not something people might go out of their way to watch Amanda Knox feature among new Danish docs

As industry analysts point out, Netflix's best shows have middling statistics which wouldn't threaten network TV Netflix: put up or shut up
Quote:
TV executives join their film industry counterparts in criticizing the streaming giant's opaque ratings game

Then you have ABC TV, which was going to make a dramatization of the case called Guilt

Turns out the series starring Billy Zane and some unknowns will show up over the summer, and not on the network, but a cable channel called Freeform, which used to be CBN, the Christian Broadcasting Network :) before ABC bought it. Still, looking forward to seeing how many people actually watch it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2016 7:34 pm   Post subject: Re: KNOX FLICKS NETFLIX   

Ergon wrote:
Apropos of nothing, but a Netflix documentary made in Denmark is not something people might go out of their way to watch Amanda Knox feature among new Danish docs

As industry analysts point out, Netflix's best shows have middling statistics which wouldn't threaten network TV Netflix: put up or shut up
Quote:
TV executives join their film industry counterparts in criticizing the streaming giant's opaque ratings game

Then you have ABC TV, which was going to make a dramatization of the case called Guilt

Turns out the series starring Billy Zane and some unknowns will show up over the summer, and not on the network, but a cable channel called Freeform, which used to be CBN, the Christian Broadcasting Network :) before ABC bought it. Still, looking forward to seeing how many people actually watch it.


ABC bought CBN back in 1990 (these channels are traded a lot here sans audience) and the content rebranded. ABC Family was doing okay but the median age of its demographic was creeping up to around 40.

It has the same ultimate ownership as Lifetime (Disney) which aired a quite passable movie on the case several years ago.

The new branding and content of the channel are aimed at those of college age and a little older. We'll see what promotion "Guilt" gets - it is set across the Atlantic and the royalty angle might grab many Americans.

Its another lurch toward media finding an "exonerated" Knox non-credible. That seems the only current direction of any lurching. :-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2016 7:59 pm   Post subject: Re: the lying liar of ISF   

JohnQ wrote:
Jackie wrote:
I think I'd prefer a more balanced system designed to favor a discovery of the whole truth - An unlimited right to silence leaves too many questions unanswered. It's antithetical to the investigation and prevention of crime.

There's got to be a better way ... we simply cannot afford to hold justice for the accused more dear than justice for the victim - indeed, as the petition against RS and cases like OJ and Casey Anthony show, this slanted approach doesn't necessarily serve the accused particularly well either: silence in court and a sliver of DOUBT will not fully restore an accused in the eyes of his/her fellow citizens, only the full, unadulterated, unconditional TRUTH (tested in court by way of rigorous cross-examination) can do that.


I agree completely.


Yeah I too could buy this.

Knox of course insisted to speak to Mignini in Dec 2007 and to get on the stand mid 2009. She was not under oath either time but also did herself no good either time.

RS never got on the stand. Both are seeing a punishment of sorts - justice not SEEN to have been done.

The pro victim movement in Italy is pretty hapless - polls show a clear majority of the population would like the system more pro victim but the small but powerful forces of corruption mostly block that.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... lies_says/

One plus in Italy is the CSM which promotes change even when the parliament is divided.

I heard good things years ago about President Napolitano as head of the justice system but his record is somewhat criticised now.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 10:40 am   Post subject: Re: KNOX FLICKS NETFLIX   

Ergon wrote:
Apropos of nothing, but a Netflix documentary made in Denmark is not something people might go out of their way to watch Amanda Knox feature among new Danish docs

As industry analysts point out, Netflix's best shows have middling statistics which wouldn't threaten network TV Netflix: put up or shut up
Quote:
TV executives join their film industry counterparts in criticizing the streaming giant's opaque ratings game


The forthcoming Netflix "Knox" documentary (which also has 2 US directors) has to be looked at very seriously, in two contexts.

First, Netflix movie streaming is administratively and technically set up in most countries of the world and represent an immense threat to cable movie channels everywhere. There is a battle going on, which Netflix could win. Their Avery report starting streaming at the end of last year had immense media fuss and viewership and brought in a ton of money. They are being watched on the stockmarket all the time as the possible next big thing. Market capitalization is already $39 billion. Here is their 5-year chart.

http://tinyurl.com/j7qlkkc

Second, while the streaming of their 10-hour "Avery" about a possible police framing for murder of a woman reporter which was 10 years in the making brought in millions of new subscribers around the world, it also has been challenged at great length for being biased in not telling ALL the facts which made the police and prosecutors look worse than they were.

I posted this report below back in January when the petition to the President to free Avery was getting tens of thousands of signatures but the fact-checking by other networks had not really begun.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... gurs_well/

Here is one of the subsequent fact checking reports, this one is by ABC. NBC aired a good one too. Check YouTube for more.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/mak ... d=36420677

Right now, Avery is still in prison, and the Wisconsin governor has no interest in granting him any breaks. Lawyers are working on his behalf, but the tilt via omissions of evidence in the Netflix series have soured many in the public and made theirs an uphill task.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 12:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I would be very interested in knowing what slant the documentary, and cable TV show "Guilt" takes.

Andrea Vogt already has had input in quite a few documentaries. Hope she gets more air time.

Re Avery I see Steve Moore trying to get in on that. He claims investigatorial misconduct. No surprise.

ETA: not to suggest Andrea Vogt's a consultant, I was hoping she would be interviewed for the show.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 6:18 pm   Post subject: Re: the lying liar of ISF   

JohnQ wrote:
Jackie wrote:
I think I'd prefer a more balanced system designed to favor a discovery of the whole truth - An unlimited right to silence leaves too many questions unanswered. It's antithetical to the investigation and prevention of crime.

There's got to be a better way ... we simply cannot afford to hold justice for the accused more dear than justice for the victim - indeed, as the petition against RS and cases like OJ and Casey Anthony show, this slanted approach doesn't necessarily serve the accused particularly well either: silence in court and a sliver of DOUBT will not fully restore an accused in the eyes of his/her fellow citizens, only the full, unadulterated, unconditional TRUTH (tested in court by way of rigorous cross-examination) can do that.


I agree completely.


Not that I know much about it, but the right to silence is surely an essential prohibition against torture or other forms of compulsion. Nobody can be compelled to answer questions or to incriminate himself. The US government's recent adoption of the Khmer Rouge trick of waterboarding is pretty appalling, as is the late US Supreme Court Justice Scalia's evil-be-thou-my-good approval of torture. The UK's most notorious miscarriage of justice began when the Birmingham Six appeared for their committal hearing at the magistrates' court visibly beaten black and blue. In those circumstances a case based on supposed confessions should have been thrown out at once, as any ten-year-old could see.

The recent modification of the right to silence in England & Wales may make sense, though. Until then, nothing could be said about a person's refusal to answer questions. It was an absolute privilege. Now, counsel for the Crown may ask jurors to draw an inference from that refusal to answer, particularly if a defence is raised in court which was not mentioned to police during the original interview. Hence the police caution, 'You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say will be taken down and may be used in evidence.'
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:00 am   Post subject: Re: KNOX FLICKS NETFLIX   

Fast Pete wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Apropos of nothing, but a Netflix documentary made in Denmark is not something people might go out of their way to watch Amanda Knox feature among new Danish docs

As industry analysts point out, Netflix's best shows have middling statistics which wouldn't threaten network TV Netflix: put up or shut up
Quote:
TV executives join their film industry counterparts in criticizing the streaming giant's opaque ratings game


The forthcoming Netflix "Knox" documentary (which also has 2 US directors) has to be looked at very seriously, in two contexts.

First, Netflix movie streaming is administratively and technically set up in most countries of the world and represent an immense threat to cable movie channels everywhere. There is a battle going on, which Netflix could win. Their Avery report starting streaming at the end of last year had immense media fuss and viewership and brought in a ton of money. They are being watched on the stockmarket all the time as the possible next big thing. Market capitalization is already $39 billion. Here is their 5-year chart.

http://tinyurl.com/j7qlkkc

Second, while the streaming of their 10-hour "Avery" about a possible police framing for murder of a woman reporter which was 10 years in the making brought in millions of new subscribers around the world, it also has been challenged at great length for being biased in not telling ALL the facts which made the police and prosecutors look worse than they were.

I posted this report below back in January when the petition to the President to free Avery was getting tens of thousands of signatures but the fact-checking by other networks had not really begun.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... gurs_well/

Here is one of the subsequent fact checking reports, this one is by ABC. NBC aired a good one too. Check YouTube for more.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/mak ... d=36420677

Right now, Avery is still in prison, and the Wisconsin governor has no interest in granting him any breaks. Lawyers are working on his behalf, but the tilt via omissions of evidence in the Netflix series have soured many in the public and made theirs an uphill task.


Netflix is over valued and I agree with this assessment of it being in the Danger Zone Netflix Only More Overvalued After Earnings Report
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2016 11:52 pm   Post subject: netflix/avery/dassey/idiocy   

It's too windy to go for a sail today, plus I've had too many Cinco De Mayo Margaritas to do it safely in any event, so I'm going to try to get caught up.

First of all, I like Netflix! "Bloodline" was AWESOME (I can't wait for the second season)! And I found the Avery doc very compelling/ persuasive!

Yes, yes, I know the media are often biased when it comes to their coverage of convictions:

P. Cassell, "The guilty and the 'innocent': An examination of alleged cases of wrongful conviction from false confessions", Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 1999:

"...academic research on miscarriages should not rely on media descriptions of the evidence against defendants. Journalists will all too often slant their reports in the direction of discovering "news" by finding that an innocent person has been wrongfully convicted."


BUT ...

I have grave reservations re the notion that Dassey's "confession" (such as it was depicted in the doc) can be considered reliable evidence in light of the fact his IQ score is well below-normal and he was only a shy/unassertive/ introverted teenager at the time (teenaged + below 80 IQ + introverted = sitting duck for a false confession to police).

What am I missing? Can someone explain to me why Dassey's "confession" should be considered relevant/ reliable/ admissible???

_______________________

PS I see the ISF thread has become quite boring without Mach, Vixen and Grinder to stir the pot enough to elicit the odd intelligent contribution from people like Planigale.

I'm going to lose interest if it's now down to the nightwatchman, the crazed New Zealander who thinks EVERY conviction is "wrongful", the 62 year old premed dropout, and the moronic "acbytesla" (What kind of handle is that anyway?! LOL What were his alternate choices: "dcbyedison"? "penicillinbyfleming"? "flightbythewrigthbrothers"? I want to change mine to "screechbywilliams"!).

Incredibly, this acby dunce has managed to make a stupendous number of posts without contributing so much a single post of value, unless you count:

a) his contention that he doesn't need to read the Court's reasoning to thoroughly understand the case (LOL); or

b) his contention that no PMFer can match his 'critical thinking' skills or his high school debate team experience, which, evidently, amounts to accusing one's female opponents of being unattractive to men, "jealous" and "frigid"/unable to "orgasm":

Image


If only the real Tesla had been as positively BRILLIANT! cl-)

(Per Frank Sfuggitivo's attack on Bettina, the screecher preacher didn't have a word of admonishment for acby on account of this revolting behavior toward Vixen - Screechy reserves his criticism exclusively for people who dare to insult ONE particular young woman, shown here, on the verge of 30, tastefully marking the anniversary of her "good friend's" murder:
Hidden Content: show
Image

Tell us, "Billy": Does God love one woman more than another??? Did Jesus love people who agreed with him more than people who disagreed with him??? Oh, and, before you answer, be sure to give your "true skeptic" ISF pals the much-sought-after scientific proof of the existence of God and Jesus or those "evidence-based thinkers" will kick you out of their club! YOU are tarnishing their "brand"!!!)
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2016 2:30 am   Post subject: Re: netflix/avery/dassey/idiocy   

Jackie wrote:
I'm going to lose interest if it's now down to ...the moronic "acbytesla" (What kind of handle is that anyway?! LOL What were his alternate choices: "dcbyedison"? "penicillinbyfleming"? "flightbythewrigthbrothers"? I want to change mine to "screechbywilliams"!).

Let's not go down that road, Jackie, or some bright spark might come up with "aciclovirbySchaffer" and we're trying to keep it clean here :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 5:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jackie,
Something for your Anglolawyer ancillary footnotes file:

For people with Scottish legal qualifications trying to enter the English legal profession:

Quote:
“If you go south, … you will have to undertake at least two more years of study…”

— Hector L MacQueen,
Studying Scots Law, 4th edition, (2012)
[Bloomsbury Professional, 2012],
[8.09] Going to England (p 123).
ISBN 9781780431024



Alternative is to become qualified in Scotland and then seek admission in England. (p 124)
Top Profile 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 1:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jackie, just to clarify, Dassey's IQ is not far below normal. His IQ is 71, which is considered and defined as low-normal.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 4:06 pm   Post subject: IQ TESTS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED   

corpusvile wrote:
Jackie, just to clarify, Dassey's IQ is not far below normal. His IQ is 71, which is considered and defined as low-normal.

IQ tests are 'fundamentally flawed'
Quote:
The idea that intelligence can be measured by IQ tests alone is a fallacy according to the largest single study into human cognition which found that it comprises of at least three distinct mental traits.

IQ tests have been used for decades to assess intelligence but they are fundamentally flawed because they do not take into account the complex nature of the human intellect and its different components, the study found.

It's not surprising given how many American children are given the standardized IQ tests that it has now intruded into the judicial process. But by all accounts Brendan Dassey was learning disabled and his treatment by the prosecution and his own lawyer Why Brendan Dassey’s Conviction May Be More Disturbing Than Steven Avery's was an affront to justice.

Of course we can be grateful that 'honors student' Knox can be hoist on her parent's own petard. Given her facility with language and um, intelligence, (so her supporters say) I don't see how Perugian cops yelling at her in Italian and cuffing her on the head caused her to falsely accuse her boss of murder.

There is some concern the upcoming Netflix Knox documentary being as accusatory of the prosecution's case. Given the blowback major networks have given on the Avery case (plus, they hate Netflix :) I have reason to believe it will be more balanced.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 5:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I get that Dassey doesn't have high intelligence and that intelligence can't definitively be quantified in terms of IQ tests but that's not the issue. Whether anyone likes it or not, or whether I personally disagree with certain cases on this regard, there's a standard degree of criminal culpability and Dassey passes it. Whether reforms need to be brought is something else, but as it Stands, his rights weren't violated. Miskelley of the wm3 had the same IQ as Dassey, yet still claimed to have given deliberately inconsistent details in some of his statements in order to confuse the cops.
Serial killer Ottis Toole, who is also of reputed low intelligence (although you'd never know it from his interviews) claimed to have manipulated the cops by gleaning data from their body language combined with photos of possible dump sites.
Both are indications of cunning.
I think more leeway should be shown to Dassey but that doesn't mean he isn't culpable. Bottom line, Ms Hallbach's rights get priority and her family. Dassey despite his learning disabilities, shares responsibility for her murder. He has to pay for it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 5:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

A 2006 psychological evaluation of Brendan Dassey found "he was in the 'low average' range of intelligence" so I do agree he meets the standards of culpability. And, having looked at the case in some detail feel the states' case against Avery and Dassey met the standard of guilt as well.

I still have a problem with the methods used against Dassey but that means nothing as the law as it stands allows the police to use such. However, I do believe in any system of law, no one class or individual's rights should get priority over the other, or it is not justice. The rights of the victim or their family do not supersede that of the defendant, ever. They are equal.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 8:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I agree on no priorities during a presumption of innocence trial stage, but once convicted, a victim's rights gets priority over a perpetrator's. That's not to say anyone should be denied due process or treated in a cruel or unusual manner when incarcerated but unless valid impropriety on the part of the cops /courts that withstands objective scrutiny, then convicted offender s shouldn't have the right to what are ultimately frivolous appeals, wastes of court time and further prolonging of victims' families pain.
Genuine miscarriages of justice occur and mitigating circumstances can apply to certain convicted felons who in spite of their crimes can still elicit some degree of sympathy.
But innocence fraud exists also and while one can personally empathise or feel sorry to a degree for some offenders, it doesn't nullify the gravity of their crimes or diminish their responsibility.
They received a fair trial and were convicted after all arguments on their behalf were made.
I feel sorry on some level for Brendan Dassey but I don't feel he has diminished responsibility and not only in a legal sense.
I don't think his lesser intelligence is a valid case to make for this, personally although I understand other peoples feelings in this regard.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2016 3:31 am   Post subject: JOE PATERNO   

The latest findings about Penn State head coach Joe Paterno in Slate Magazine
Quote:
Former Penn State head coach Joe Paterno knew about assistant coach Jerry Sandusky’s sexual abuse against children in the 1970s and did nothing about it, according to a court filing and a CNN interview with one of Sandusky’s victims. If the allegations are true, they reveal a sickening new chapter in a case that had seemed to have closed with the conviction of Sandusky in 2012 for sexually abusing 10 boys and the death of Paterno that same year.

Contrast that with ex-FBI agent Jim Clemente's attack on the Freeh SIC Report written on behalf of the Paterno family. Clemente, who famously challenged me to a debate on the Knox case for Alison Weiner's You Tube channel, then backed out when BR Mull accepted the challenge, wrote Jim Clemente Report Summary
Quote:
There is no other way to say it: on the most critical aspects of the Sandusky investigation, the SIC report is a failure. It does a tremendous disservice to Penn State, Joe Paterno, and the victims of Jerry Sandusky.

Using his credentials as a "former top FBI profiler" he concluded
Quote:
•Each one of the Freeh report’s main conclusions about Joe Paterno is wrong due to a lack of evidence, a failure to consider alternative evidence or is directly contradicted by the evidence. (Page 9)
•The Freeh report missed an opportunity to educate the public about “nice-guy” acquaintance offenders. Indeed, this case has nothing to do with Penn State football or Joe Paterno, and if the public continues to believe that, it will unwittingly cancel out everything we have learned about child sexual victimization. (Page 69)
•There is no evidence to support the conclusion that Paterno engaged in “an active agreement to conceal.” It is clear from the evidence that Paterno never made any attempt to hide any information, hinder or impede any investigation, silence any witnesses or limit the number of people former assistant coach Mike McQueary reported an incident to in 2001. (Pages 35-36)

Odd, that he missed the fact Paterno didn't follow up on the serious allegations.

Odd, that even his cohort Steve Moore got it right about Paterno's responsibility on that score, so credit Moore on this at least.

Odd, how much Clemente failed to consider..
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2016 7:22 am   Post subject: Re: JOE PATERNO   

Ergon wrote:
The latest findings about Penn State head coach Joe Paterno in Slate Magazine
Quote:
Former Penn State head coach Joe Paterno knew about assistant coach Jerry Sandusky’s sexual abuse against children in the 1970s and did nothing about it, according to a court filing and a CNN interview with one of Sandusky’s victims. If the allegations are true, they reveal a sickening new chapter in a case that had seemed to have closed with the conviction of Sandusky in 2012 for sexually abusing 10 boys and the death of Paterno that same year.

Contrast that with ex-FBI agent Jim Clemente's attack on the Freeh SIC Report written on behalf of the Paterno family. Clemente, who famously challenged me to a debate on the Knox case for Alison Weiner's You Tube channel, then backed out when BR Mull accepted the challenge, wrote Jim Clemente Report Summary
Quote:
There is no other way to say it: on the most critical aspects of the Sandusky investigation, the SIC report is a failure. It does a tremendous disservice to Penn State, Joe Paterno, and the victims of Jerry Sandusky.

Using his credentials as a "former top FBI profiler" he concluded
Quote:
•Each one of the Freeh report’s main conclusions about Joe Paterno is wrong due to a lack of evidence, a failure to consider alternative evidence or is directly contradicted by the evidence. (Page 9)
•The Freeh report missed an opportunity to educate the public about “nice-guy” acquaintance offenders. Indeed, this case has nothing to do with Penn State football or Joe Paterno, and if the public continues to believe that, it will unwittingly cancel out everything we have learned about child sexual victimization. (Page 69)
•There is no evidence to support the conclusion that Paterno engaged in “an active agreement to conceal.” It is clear from the evidence that Paterno never made any attempt to hide any information, hinder or impede any investigation, silence any witnesses or limit the number of people former assistant coach Mike McQueary reported an incident to in 2001. (Pages 35-36)

Odd, that he missed the fact Paterno didn't follow up on the serious allegations.

Odd, that even his cohort Steve Moore got it right about Paterno's responsibility on that score, so credit Moore on this at least.

Odd, how much Clemente failed to consider..

Clemente is rumoured to be launching a new ad for future innocent clients.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ow4nkTgUUE mop-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2016 7:17 pm   Post subject: JIMMY SAVILE   

Speaking of the unspeakable Jimmy Savile, Louis Theroux says in The Independent
Quote:
Louis Theroux has said that Jimmy Savile did not appear “malevolent” at the time and if he had appeared malicious he would have been caught far more quickly.

Appearing on Peston on Sunday on ITV, he said that he had a friendly relationship with the disgraced former DJ.
Theroux is currently making a second BBC Documentary on Savile in attempt to find out how Savile managed to conceal his crimes.

Perhaps the reason Saville got away with it was so many friends and bosses turned a blind eye towards the warning signs.

Which makes Clemente's apologia for coach Paterno so strange. As an FBI behavioral analyst who claims to speak for children of sexual exploitation, this was odd:
Quote:
•This case is a textbook example of how people in the general public misinterpret the behavior of child sex offenders. And, Jerry Sandusky is a textbook example of a preferential child sex offender and a “nice-guy” acquaintance offender. He effectively groomed most of the people who came in contact with him, including child care experts, psychologists, professionals, celebrities, athletes, coaches, friends and family. The sad truth is people do not recognize the “grooming” behavior of “nice-guy” acquaintance offenders, especially when they know or are close to that person. (Pages 12, 67, 91)
•Unfortunately for the ordinary layman, these type of grooming techniques, as employed by Sandusky, create a huge obstacle to identifying actual offenders. In order to identify and stop child molesters, we must understand how grooming works and the complicated, counter-intuitive dynamics of child sexual victimization. (Page 21)
•Finally, Freeh’s investigators got it wrong because they investigated the case in the wrong way. The Freeh report ignored decades of expert research and analysis regarding child sex offender cases. They investigated this case as if it were a “stranger danger” or “monster predator” offender, instead of the very different and insidious “nice-guy” acquaintance offender. It is a common mistake, but it led them to draw erroneous conclusions. Clemente’s report is an effort to set the record straight. (Page 10)

Ahem, but you do not excuse a shocking lack of responsibility to child victims of sexual predators, be they Jimmy Savile or Jerry Sandusky, because of personal acquaintance or they seemed like 'nice guys'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 1:53 am   Post subject: MONSTER OF FLORENCE   

More twists and turns in the Monster of Florence case.

A Bergamo court has acquitted OGGI journalist Giangavino Sulas and director Umberto Brindani of the charges of defamation brought by prosecutor Giuliano Mignini. Complaint was based on OGGI report of May 5, 2010 on charges brought against 21 suspects in the death of Dr. Francesco Narducci whose body was found in Lake Trasimene in October 1985. Investigators believed him to be involved in the Monster of Florence case.

Sulas claimed Mignini's theory of the case was based on a Satanic cult ordering body parts for use in satanic rituals.

PG Mignini might appeal this decision to the Appeals court.

Many believe that the political interference in the Meredith Kercher case is a carryover from the Monster of Florence case, with Mario Spezi and Doug Preston being the latest weapons against Mignini.

The Supreme Court did rule in 2013 that the investigating team led by Michele Giuttari and PM Mignini had been interfered with in the proper carrying out of their duties in the Narducci case.

The attending forensic pathologist wasn't allowed to examine the body.

Narducci's close friend the lawyer Alfredo Brizioli interfered with the police investigation then got off charges as well Corriere dell'Umbria

The official finding was death by drowning though he had been strangled; his hyoid bone was broken.

Definite interference by masonic elements within the judiciary and police force.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 11:49 am   Post subject: Monster Of Florence   

Did Sulas actually claim this, Ergon? That it was Mignini's theory? One of the first people to moot a theory of an occult sect was actually Sollecito's defence consultant, Dr Francesco Bruno, who in 1985 drew up a profile of the MOF for the SISDE/Italian secret service, who according to Detective Michele Giuttari, had a $200,000 black budgeted investigation into the case, unbeknownst to the Florentine cops at the time. Bruno even named a villa where occult rituals may have taken place. Pietro Pacciani, convicted at his first instance trial for 14 of the MOF murders worked there as a gardener. Residents included a suspected cult member, Swiss Artist Jean Claude Falbriard, who claimed he'd fled the place after witnessing black magic rituals one night. (Two nurses also claimed that Pacciani had bragged to them about occult rituals being held at the home at night.) Another resident included the father of Florence's deputy attorney, Francesco Fleury, according to the Scottish Morning Herald.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/sep/09/rorycarroll.theobserver
Pietro Pacciani had died at home in mysterious circumstances while awaiting a second level appellate, of a mixture of heart and asthma medication. According to the Scottish Morning Herald, Francesco Bruno's name was allegedly on one of the prescription medicines.
In 2002 a series of corpse mutilations took place in Florence, with the wounds inflicted being similar to the MOF murders. Some of the corpses were of former residents of the rest home.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/1400566/Monster-of-Florence-blamed-for-mutilations.html

In and around the same period and possibly even earlier than Bruno's report, religious historian Massimo Introvigne had approached the cops with suspicions of a cult being behind the murders. Introvigne stressed that the cultists weren't necessarily Satanic, but more than likely fetishists who ultimately were using occult trappings to fuel their pathology.
Also at around the same time, a French private detective hired by the families of the final MOF victims, both of whom were French tourists, claimed that a Satanic cult were behind the murders.

Years later, Detective Giuttari also suspected an occult sect after reviewing the case, making him the fourth independent source to suspect the same thing. Apparently the alleged group weren't Satanic, but believed that ritual magic could cure either sexual disorders or STDs, but I think it was disorders. Interestingly enough, several of the suspected cultists had medical backgrounds, at least three more suspects were medical doctors, apart from Narducci, while another was a pharmacist.

It wasn't Mignini's theory from what I read and indeed he had no idea who Francesco Narducci was and certainly didn't know that he was a MOF suspect and didn't learn this until he met with the Florence cops while seeking info on Narducci.
According to Freemason Ferdinando Benedetti Narducci was a Freemason and suspected by his fellow Masons of being involved in the MOF murders.
http://insufficienzadiprove.blogspot.ie/2010/03/ferdinando-benedetti.html

The journalist also apparently says that the Florence 21 were found innocent? They weren't, only Brizioli (who was on trial for burglary in his youth and is currently defending Sollecito on his upcoming calunnia trial) was acquitted, the rest had the charges dropped due to prescrizione/statue of limitations expiring.

Anyway it's without a doubt one of the most bizarre cases of serial murder I've ever read.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 12:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Btw, and I realise this is a big request, but if anyone who speaks Italian could ever add subs to parts 1 & 2 pf this programme on the alleged cult behind the MOF murders, I'd be immensely grateful. :mrgreen:
It covers the Narducci affair and the allegations regarding the senior citizens home, with interviews from both Giuttari and Spezi.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-IvFxbLxsE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb4f5qTDaoY
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 4:45 pm   Post subject: SOLLECITO GUMBEL VILIPENDIO TRIAL   

Sulas didn't originate the theory, corpusvile. Charges were brought for the way he presented it, as defaming Mignini.

Yes, the case dragged on and in the end charges dropped due to time factors.

And now, Narducci's friend Alfredo Brizioli will be in Florence Court May 13 to defend Sollecito and Gumbel against the vilipendio charge against Mignini.

http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/0 ... refresh_ce

https://twitter.com/andreavogt/status/6 ... 8804131841

Indeed, a very strange case and the circus around it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 8:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hello everybody,

I'm back - after a long break - with this translation of Sollecito's Il Giornale interview of April 25 - a bit late, I know, but better late than never. ;) Quite predictably, there's nothing new in what he says: he complains about his misfortune, as usual, accuses others of ignorance, praises himself, and so on. You can probably safely skip it unless you are interested in these vanities and want to torture yourself by going deeper into the details of being "depressed" (or "insane"). Take away from that what you will. :) By the way, has anybody checked recently: is his "Memories" website up and running now or not?

April 25, 2016

Interview with Raffaele Sollecito
By Nino Materi

I understood (realized) that freedom meant seeing a fridge again (being able to open it)

He was accused and acquitted for the murder of Meredith: "After 4 years in prison I looked dazed. I don’t want to forget, but tell (about my experience.) That is why I have become a commentator on TV"

Every morning Raffaele Sollecito, 32, a computer engineer, at his home in Giovinazzo (Bari) looks in a mirror. And he sees, in addition to his face, the reflection of a memory. "In prison - he says - mirrors are forbidden. In there, you're just a ghost. And the ghosts are denied a mirror."

Sollecito, was locked up ”in there”, innocent, for four years. "A shadow among shadows, junk in the trash." As in a garbage bag in the trash compactor of Italian justice that has him first mangled and then, finally, "rehabilitated". Eight years (since 2007, when Meredith Kercher was killed in Perugia, till 2015, when the Supreme Court finally acquitted Sollecito), in the bins, marked with "load" and "unload", of the collection of judgments. […]

Freedom regained. The return home. What was the first thing you did?

"I opened the refrigerator."

Because?

"In the cell the refrigerator could not be kept. Drinking a cold beer was a dream. At home, in front of the fridge, I was mesmerized. But soon I would have to worry about something else."

Even if the worst was now a past nightmare?

"But already there loomed another devil."

Which one?

"The specter of depression."

You felt its nails on your skin?

"With difficulty I managed to free myself also from its terrible grip."

How did you defeat it?

"By taking long trips."

Even to the US?

"The papers said I was going to celebrate with my ex-girlfriend Amanda."

But you didn’t?

"Yes, I went to visit. But the main purpose was to find myself again."

Who was closest to you in the darkest moments?

"My father and Greta, my partner."

Do you dream of becoming a father?

"I will become, sooner or later."

When your son grows up, what will you say to him?

"That his father has never lacked courage. That in life, even if you are a victim of an injustice, it is always worth fighting for (freedom). And victory can be a wonderful prize. "

Do you believe in God?

"Yes, in prison I often invoked Him (in prayers). But not for me."

Who did you remember in you prayers?

"My parents. And Meredith."

Did you yourself manage to retain a modicum of faith?

"I had faith especially in my lawyer Giulia Bongiorno, an exceptional woman. With her I studied all the records of the trial."

You once said: "Fortunately, my mother died ...."

"If she were still alive, she would suffer terribly from everything I've been through. Mom was sensitive and fragile. My father, however, turned out to be a rock."


IL GIORNALE

To be continued....
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 8:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Interview with Raffaele Sollecito (cont'd)
By Nino Materi

...

Today you are hyperactive.

"It's true. It is a kind of retaliation for the many years in which I was robbed of my youth. Playing rugby gives me joy. Rugby is the metaphor of my life. Fighting, fighting, falling to the ground. And getting up again. "

You also found the Radical Party.

"Pannella is a myth. I met him. It brings up the ponytail. I remember when I wore a ponytail, too, and the papers used to call me the killer with a ponytail.

A sentence of Pannella that has stuck in memory?

"When he told me that my story reminded him of that of Tortora. Pannella is the only politician to have the fate of prisoners at heart. To denounce the psychological torture undergone by those caught up in jail. "

A reality that you have seen at first hand.

"Shocking experience which cannot remain shrouded in silence. I have the civic and moral duty to make it public."

For this you have also become a commentator on TV.

"Paolo Liguori said that Sollecito has more experience in matters of justice than some beautiful criminologists who haunt the television lounges. I have a very specific goal."

Which?

"The one to denounce the absurdity of the media trials (processi mediatici) that transform legal dramas in squalid gossip programs. On TV you should discuss only trial records, documents, evidence. But this would require hard work and seriousness. Then, most prefer to play with colorful gossip."

About which you couldn’t do much.

"For years, in the media, my life has been a mix of lies. I have been painted, depending on who was the author of the picture, as a drug addict, a Daddy’s boy, a murderer, a sexual degenerate. I’ve never been able to make sense of so much unjustified aggression towards me."

The subtitle of your book "A step out of the night" (Longanesi) reads: "All that you have never dreamed of me." What is it that we have not imagined you to be?

"No one imagined that I was, and am, a regular guy, no nonsense on my mind. But I imagine that not everyone was comfortable with that. You want to add some cynical taste to snipe (take a shot at) at the monster?"

People now, after your final acquittal, have changed their opinion about you?

"I hope so. But I'm afraid not. There are so many ignorant people around."

There was a conspiracy against you?

"No. But there was still so much arrogance, many prejudices and so much lack of preparation on the part of those who had to ascertain the truth and instead preferred to hunt for ghosts."

The Supreme Court, in the grounds with which it finally exonerated you, used hard words against those who had previously convicted you.

"A hardness that did not surprise me. Too bad, however, beyond the moral satisfaction, no one will ever give me back what I have lost. But all that remains – a regret."

For what?

"There were strong indications that would have allowed to solve the mystery of Meredith's death very quickly. I refer to the imprint of bloody hand on the bed sheet (sic - lenzuolo) left by the murderer."

To whom belonged that imprint?

"To Rudy Guede".

Is he the one who killed Meredith?

"This is what the judges have established."

Did you ask the State for compensation for wrongful imprisonment? There was talk of 500 thousand euro.

"It would still be a sufficient sum. My family has spent more than double to meet the costs of proceedings in the various levels of courts. We were forced to sell two apartments. And we are drowning in debts. My father is a surgeon, has a very good salary. But we are not rich. "

You often go to schools and universities to talk about your experience and give your testimony, what is the criticism that struck you the most?

"It was not a criticism. But a tip came from the Prosecutor of the Republic of Bari who one day said to me: You have to detach yourself from your legal odyssey, otherwise you'll never forget ...."

Your answer?

"That I did not want to forget. In fact, I want to tell everything to everyone. For a moment, when I came out of prison, I decided to take up on a new identity in a country far away. By changing the name, and even the face. But then I decided not to hide (distort). Today I can say I made the right choice."

You have now become an entrepreneur. You’ve founded, thanks to a grant of the Puglia Region, the startup 'memories' which guarantees, among other things, flowers on the graves of the dead which are located thousands of kilometers away.

"I created this project thinking about my mother."

Meredith is buried on the outskirts of London. Have you also thought about a flower for her?

"Yup. And I myself will take it [there]. I did it five years ago. I'll just make it with love."


IL GIORNALE

---------------------------

The end.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2016 9:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Here is the latest message / comment from the initiator of the change.org petition to keep Sollecito off TV:

We are not "ignorant," we ask for respect and discretion!
By Simona Miceli

May 1, 2016 - Dear supporters, I'm sending you the latest interview with Raffaele Sollecito in 'Il Giornale', where our friend explained for the umpteenth time what motivates him to have his say on television. He is asked if he believes that people have changed their minds / opinions about him and he says that there is a lot of ignorance out there. He says only the evidence counts, justice does not work ... and you will understand that expert! But no one knows what is the evidence that exonerates him I might add. We continue to spread our message, which is simply this: it doesn't matter whether Sollecito is guilty or innocent, the judgment was delivered; It just isn't appropriate for a phenomenon created by the media - much criticized - there is still that it should serve as an example for whoever looks at it. Liguori, do you understand?? Hi all and spread it (our message) again, again, and again!


https://www.change.org/p/no-a-raffaele- ... u/16428743
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 2:06 am   Post subject: SOLLECITO'S MEMORIES   

Hi, guermantes,
Quote:
By the way, has anybody checked recently: is his "Memories" website up and running or not?

Not yet, though he and his intern have been at it since last summer.

http://www.memories.com being taken, he registered it as http://www.beonmemories.com huh-) and there'll be a presentation in Milan May 20th 2016. Facebook Events
He tried to register it with domain secrecy services http://who.is/whois/www.beonmemories.com
but his personal info keeps popping up http://who.is/whois/www.beonmemories.com
Whatever.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline NorrisC


Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:34 pm

Posts: 123

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 3:58 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
I get that Dassey doesn't have high intelligence and that intelligence can't definitively be quantified in terms of IQ tests but that's not the issue. Whether anyone likes it or not, or whether I personally disagree with certain cases on this regard, there's a standard degree of criminal culpability and Dassey passes it. Whether reforms need to be brought is something else, but as it Stands, his rights weren't violated. Miskelley of the wm3 had the same IQ as Dassey, yet still claimed to have given deliberately inconsistent details in some of his statements in order to confuse the cops.
Serial killer Ottis Toole, who is also of reputed low intelligence (although you'd never know it from his interviews) claimed to have manipulated the cops by gleaning data from their body language combined with photos of possible dump sites.
Both are indications of cunning.
I think more leeway should be shown to Dassey but that doesn't mean he isn't culpable. Bottom line, Ms Hallbach's rights get priority and her family. Dassey despite his learning disabilities, shares responsibility for her murder. He has to pay for it.


Anyone who carries out these types of crimes are either completely fucked in the head through being simple, or completely fucked in the head due to having the "I'm too intelligent to get caught" mentality. If someone is mentally too far gone that they can't be held responsible for crimes they commit, then they should be locked up for the good of themselves and others.

I think people with mental illness should be sent away to hospitals rather than prisons, but I completely disagree they should be given more leeway. I think mental health patients are much more likely to reoffend simply because they are, by definition, mental.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 8:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Sulas didn't originate the theory, corpusvile. Charges were brought for the way he presented it, as defaming Mignini.

Yes, the case dragged on and in the end charges dropped due to time factors.

And now, Narducci's friend Alfredo Brizioli will be in Florence Court May 13 to defend Sollecito and Gumbel against the vilipendio charge against Mignini.

http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/0 ... refresh_ce

https://twitter.com/andreavogt/status/6 ... 8804131841

Indeed, a very strange case and the circus around it.


I predict an acquittal for Knife Boy and Gumbel. I will veritably whoop how wrong I was if I'm wrong, but the way things have been playing out, I reckon they'll walk.

Sollecito's serial interviews are really gonna haunt him, should he ever get himself in trouble again.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 1:16 pm   Post subject: ITALIAN BANKS CRASHING AGAIN   

Zero Hedge
Italian Banks Are Crashing (Again) After Bad-Loan Writedowns Soar
Quote:
Banco Popolare is dragging the rest of the Italian banking system drastically lower today after a "susprise" Q1 loss driven by soaring bad loan writedowns. Banco Popolare is down 14% on the day (25% in a week) to a record low, as Reuters reports the bank was forced to admit the reality of its bad loans by the European Central Bank as a condition for approving a planned merger with Banca Popolare di Milano that will create Italy's third-biggest banking group.

As Reuters notes, Italian banks have lost nearly 40 percent of their market value so far this year, weighed down by concerns they could need additional capital to shoulder losses from sales of bad loans that rose to 360 billion euros ($410 billion) during a long recession.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 3:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Sulas didn't originate the theory, corpusvile. Charges were brought for the way he presented it, as defaming Mignini.

Yes, the case dragged on and in the end charges dropped due to time factors.

And now, Narducci's friend Alfredo Brizioli will be in Florence Court May 13 to defend Sollecito and Gumbel against the vilipendio charge against Mignini.

http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/0 ... refresh_ce

https://twitter.com/andreavogt/status/6 ... 8804131841

Indeed, a very strange case and the circus around it.


I predict an acquittal for Knife Boy and Gumbel. I will veritably whoop how wrong I was if I'm wrong, but the way things have been playing out, I reckon they'll walk.

Sollecito's serial interviews are really gonna haunt him, should he ever get himself in trouble again.


1. On the Narducci case. Ergon already linked to that very good article by Machiavelli on TJMK about Michele Giuttari - after that, Michele published his autobiography, which is the final word standing, I have it (in Italian) and can share it by email. In effect he and Dr Mignini won anyway because Spetzi lost and spent time in prison for calunnia. Oggi was mainly channeling him.

2. On the RS & Gumbel book trial. Here are the actual passages Dr Mignini complained to Florence about.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php ... _Passages/

What we know since is that Bongiorno would not take the case and was angry at the book which made it look like she okayed it, stupid claims and all. Last year the defense foundered in Florence and could do little more than quibble over the translation (by the lawyer for Mignini) of the key passages, so a new one was ordered.

Then the judge told the defense to write out counter-arguments and file them. That was done a couple of months ago. Both the judge and prosecutor have been unsympathetic to Sollecito as the book was scathing about Italy and Italian justice.

If the trial DOES go ahead tomorrow an instant verdict is possible. On the 2 books GM is on strongest ground and has not lost a trick so far.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 5:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
Did Sulas actually claim this, Ergon? That it was Mignini's theory? One of the first people to moot a theory of an occult sect was actually Sollecito's defence consultant, Dr Francesco Bruno, who in 1985 drew up a profile of the MOF for the SISDE/Italian secret service, who according to Detective Michele Giuttari, had a $200,000 black budgeted investigation into the case, unbeknownst to the Florentine cops at the time. Bruno even named a villa where occult rituals may have taken place. Pietro Pacciani, convicted at his first instance trial for 14 of the MOF murders worked there as a gardener. Residents included a suspected cult member, Swiss Artist Jean Claude Falbriard, who claimed he'd fled the place after witnessing black magic rituals one night. (Two nurses also claimed that Pacciani had bragged to them about occult rituals being held at the home at night.) Another resident included the father of Florence's deputy attorney, Francesco Fleury, according to the Scottish Morning Herald.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/sep/09/rorycarroll.theobserver
Pietro Pacciani had died at home in mysterious circumstances while awaiting a second level appellate, of a mixture of heart and asthma medication. According to the Scottish Morning Herald, Francesco Bruno's name was allegedly on one of the prescription medicines.
In 2002 a series of corpse mutilations took place in Florence, with the wounds inflicted being similar to the MOF murders. Some of the corpses were of former residents of the rest home.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/1400566/Monster-of-Florence-blamed-for-mutilations.html

In and around the same period and possibly even earlier than Bruno's report, religious historian Massimo Introvigne had approached the cops with suspicions of a cult being behind the murders. Introvigne stressed that the cultists weren't necessarily Satanic, but more than likely fetishists who ultimately were using occult trappings to fuel their pathology.
Also at around the same time, a French private detective hired by the families of the final MOF victims, both of whom were French tourists, claimed that a Satanic cult were behind the murders.

Years later, Detective Giuttari also suspected an occult sect after reviewing the case, making him the fourth independent source to suspect the same thing. Apparently the alleged group weren't Satanic, but believed that ritual magic could cure either sexual disorders or STDs, but I think it was disorders. Interestingly enough, several of the suspected cultists had medical backgrounds, at least three more suspects were medical doctors, apart from Narducci, while another was a pharmacist.

It wasn't Mignini's theory from what I read and indeed he had no idea who Francesco Narducci was and certainly didn't know that he was a MOF suspect and didn't learn this until he met with the Florence cops while seeking info on Narducci.
According to Freemason Ferdinando Benedetti Narducci was a Freemason and suspected by his fellow Masons of being involved in the MOF murders.
http://insufficienzadiprove.blogspot.ie/2010/03/ferdinando-benedetti.html

The journalist also apparently says that the Florence 21 were found innocent? They weren't, only Brizioli (who was on trial for burglary in his youth and is currently defending Sollecito on his upcoming calunnia trial) was acquitted, the rest had the charges dropped due to prescrizione/statue of limitations expiring.

Anyway it's without a doubt one of the most bizarre cases of serial murder I've ever read.


All seems good here and for me has 2-3 new facts, although theres a lot more than this also. The villa is on a hillside west of Florence. Preston & Spetzi were recorded jubilant that they had planted evidence there to frame a man the police were quite sure was innocent; thats why GM interviewed Preston who was terrified he might spend the rest of his days in prison. We have both the police tapes and the complaint then against Spetzi etc which you are welcome to see.

The Florence 21 - do you mean the Narducci 22? The Supreme Court reinstated most cases against them but the statute of limitations ran out on some. You surely know that Micheli was a cause of part of the delay. Elements in the Florence courts definitely were on the sect/cabals payroll and in the process of suing Mignini were able to get the huge case file back to Florence and then disappeared it - a real tragedy as it probably means now its forever stalemated though we WELCOME further digging. Among further reading:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _annulled/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... g_preston/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... s_preston/
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline JohnQ


Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:41 am

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 8:24 am   Post subject: Re: SOLLECITO'S MEMORIES   

Ergon wrote:
Hi, guermantes,
Quote:
By the way, has anybody checked recently: is his "Memories" website up and running or not?

Not yet, though he and his intern have been at it since last summer.

http://www.memories.com being taken, he registered it as http://www.beonmemories.com huh-) and there'll be a presentation in Milan May 20th 2016. Facebook Events
He tried to register it with domain secrecy services http://who.is/whois/www.beonmemories.com
but his personal info keeps popping up http://who.is/whois/www.beonmemories.com
Whatever.


This is starting to look like the work (sic) of a con artist.

60,000- 70,000 Euros is a lot for registering a domain name.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 11:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi Pete,
Yeah I meant those indicted over the Narducci affair. I'm not sure what Michelis role was or with the day to day court proceedings. I did read that Michelis report is massive, over 900 pages? I had also thought that he'd been partially annulled and then partially reinstated?
I may well be wrong on this though as I'm not as familiar as Mach is and nowhere near as much as I'd ideally like to be, so any corrections are appreciated. I wasn't aware that Micheli caused the delay or for what reason and again, any info will be appreciated. I know Narducci's wife - who is from a very wealthy fashion empire family - feels he was murdered and Knife boy's former defence shill Francesco Bruno gives credence to the body swap suspicions of the cops. I'm on my phone ATM but will edit to provide an interview with Bruno later. ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 1:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi, JohnQ, AFAIK the 60-70,000 Euros was a grant from the local government to develop his 'business'. Which he's been using for personal business; shouldn't take that long for mr. Computer engineer and intern to put up the site. Which seems to be taking, lots of time.

By comparison, PMF and the Meredith Kercher Wiki takes a few hundred dollars per year to host, plus the thousands of hours of volunteer time putting it together, of course.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 1:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Oh yes, he rented an office too, it's a room in a building he's the beneficial owner of :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 1:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Here's the May 20 roll out presentation:


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline olleosnep


Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 12:03 pm

Posts: 117

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 6:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Not crime relate-d but still a sad case; Cassazione confirmed sentences against Thyssenkrupp.

http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/notizie/ ... id=ADkRiNH

The case is related to a factory fire that killed 7 workers at a Thyssenkrupp plant in Torino in December 2007.

Video reconstruction of what likely happened:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la7F1vafjqo

Video of the only survivor of the harrowing incident:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewh1nBO9E3w
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 7:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Interview withFrancesco Bruno on Narducci & the MOF.
http://insufficienzadiprove.blogspot.ie/2009/01/il-mostro-di-firenze-intervista.html
He seems to think a single killer was responsible, although seems also inconsistent. That said he also felt "The kids" were innocent also, after being retained as a Defence consultant. Bruno, Brizioli, Micheli, Crini, Introna, Preston, Spezi, Lavorino- odd how the same players keep popping up in Meredith's case, although I'm sure Micheli and Crini were more due to their occupation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 8:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Def the same killer and gun. Was it to collect body parts for some pathological ritual? Who knows.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 9:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I don't know actually. I've wondered if several killers working for a possible group were hired over the years. It's a complex murky case though that probably requires its own thread. :mrgreen:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2016 4:18 am   Post subject: THE MONSTER OF FLORENCE   

The markings showed they came from the same gun The Monster of Florence
Quote:
The Gun of the Mostro

The biggest piece of the puzzle in the Monster of Florence case is the gun used, which was always the same - a Beretta 22 caliber pistol loaded with Winchester series H bullets.

An H embossed in the bullet

As we shall see, understanding the enigma of the gun, would mean finding the solution to the crimes.

Yet nobody has been able to do this.

It was very easy to identify the fact that the same gun had been used for all the crimes because the firing pin left a particular mark on the shell casing of the bullets.

This defective firing pin, and the fact that the Monster of Florence always used the same bullets produced before 1968 and with an H embossed on the back, allowed the police to determine with absolute certainty that the same person was responsible for all the crimes.

The Monster of Florence has intrigued investigators, psychologists, and criminologists for decades because it is the only crime case of its type in the history of criminology.

I wouldn't say a sole killer is an 'absolute certainty', but likelihood is quite high. Was Pacciani involved in some way? Perhaps.
Quote:
The crime is considered an ‘open and shut case’ and is solved quite quickly.

The woman was the wife of Stefano Mele, a much older man considered mentally slow. She was also the lover of several other men, including 3 brothers, the Vinci’s, who were part of a group of Sardinians who emigrated to Tuscany and were living and working in and around Florence.

Giovanni, Salvatore and Francesco Vinci, manual laborers and petty criminals, had all been lovers of Barbara Locci at some point, with Salvatore even having moved into Locci and Mele’s home for an extended period.

The husband, Stefano Mele, was convicted of the crime.

The evidence against him was:
•A paraffin glove test that proved positive showing that he had recently fired a gun
•The man also confessed, but then retracted his confession, then confessed again, also while accusing the Vinci brothers of also being involved, but in the end admitted to committing the murders by himself
•As the police saw it, he had a motive, his wife was betraying him with several other men and he probably had just got fed up
•He was supposedly home ‘sick in bed’ when the crime was committed, which didn’t make for a very convincing alibi.

Natalino too told a few different versions of the facts:
•First he said his father was there when the shootings occurred, as well as some other men including one named ‘Salvatore’ (likely a referrence to the Vinci brother). Later, he said that he hadn’t seen his father there at all, in fact he’d seen nobody that he recognized
•Initially he said that he got to the house a mile away by being carried on a man’s shoulders while this anonymous person sang a popular song to him to put him at ease. Later he changed his story saying that he had walked to the house on his own (although he had no shoes and it was pitch black in the woods)

In spite of accusing on-and-off the Vinci brothers and in spite of his son Natalino’s changing stories, Mele – the cuckolded husband - was convicted and sent to jail for 14 years.


I don't think he was responsible. He was clearly mentally challenged and could have killed his wife. But several other couples over the years? I'm not even sure it was Vinci.

My read of Il Mostro is a highly intelligent, psychopath.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2016 7:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Always the same gun over decades doesn't mean necessarly the same culprit. If there was a group with a leader in the background, that leader could have chosen the culprit and somehow ritually handed to that person the "ritual" gun with "H" on it plus the instruction how to do.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2016 7:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Mele couldn't have done the other murders anyway, as he was in prison at the time for the '68 murders.

Oh I believe the same weapon was used. I simply think an argument can be made for various killers over the years. I also think that Mele didn't necessarily commit the first Locci/Lo Bianco murders, but may possibly have been framed by close associates of his, one of whom was a MOF suspect himself, suspected by the cops, (as opposed to plagiarising journalists) and indeed arrested at one point and only released after the MOF murders of two German tourists.
I'm somewhat doubtful that Pacciani committed all of the murders although I reckon he played a part in some of them. Certain court testimony suggests that he was looking to recruit new killers before his arrest, offering at least two criminals (one a rapist and double murderer) money and a house. One of the crims testified that Pacciani had offered him money to commit a double murder in accordance with the MOF M.O.
Also, the wounds weren't inflicted with the same precision during the removal of body parts. There were considerably more skilled incisions and cuts made in the June '81 De Nuccio/Faggi murders than there were in the later October Baldi/Cambi murders of the same year, which were done far more crudely, which is odd, considering the murders with the cruder wounds were at a later date.
Narducci apparently had a .22 from what I read, and was a crack shot, visiting a target practice range several times a week. It's thought he was sending taunting letters to the cops. When the authorities wished to conduct DNA tests on the envelopes of the letters, they disappeared, one of several pieces of evidence that mysteriously vanished, over the years.

Also, I suspect the Florence Webguide are simply lazily using Spezi as a source, as they consider his novel masquerading as a true account "The most accurate version". It's Spezi who claims that an anonymous letter came to the cops telling them to look into the first double murder in 1968, with no sources to back this up, which connects things neatly into his Sardinian theory.
Yet the sadly now defunct True Crime Library- which uses Magdeline Nabb among others as sources and uses no references at all from Spezi or Preston- claims that a veteran Carabinieri officer, Francesco Fiore remembered the double murders of '68 and suggested they go back and revisit it.

The case will never be truly solved unless there really was a cult and one of them makes a deathbed confession or sends a confession to the cops/papers after he dies.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2016 8:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

elisa wrote:
Always the same gun over decades doesn't mean necessarly the same culprit. If there was a group with a leader in the background, that leader could have chosen the culprit and somehow ritually handed to that person the "ritual" gun with "H" on it plus the instruction how to do.


Or the gun may have been hidden in a designated place, to be picked up whenever a murder was required. It may also have been stripped and re-assembled, even.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2016 12:12 am   Post subject: DELAYS DEFAMATION TRIALS   

Further updates from Italy. The first of the defamation trials against Mignini, that is Sollecito/Gumbel, now moved to March 03, 2017 in Florence under Judge de Cecco. No news on the Knox book defamation trial.

ETA: The trial was not delayed. The hearing was only to discuss the admissibility of the evidence as requested by the parties. The evidence has been admitted and so on March 3, 2017 there is the exam of the first two witnesses. GM will be the first witness.

So, justice not denied, but definitely, delayed.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2016 7:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I sure hope they don't keep delaying things until prescrizione kicks in. Not that they will as I'm sure they wish for justice and not for anything involving Knox and Sollecito to go away at this point so I'm sure Knox's upcoming trial won't be delayed also, whenever it gets going. It's not like the Italian judiciary are prone to bizarre acquittals or stretching things out so the perp can get off Scot free or anything, so I for one am looking for justice to be done some time in 2025 when they finally get around to things...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2016 6:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Or are they waiting for another government and maybe better economic situation independent from other rich countries? Also Germany was pretty pro Knox, also there good PR by the German FOA and Knox' relatives....sad
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2016 1:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I don't wish to sound harsh or come across as cynical (as I'm not unduly cynical by nature), but I simply wouldn't trust the Italian judiciary at this point. The case against Knox/Sollecito was an absolute slam dunk in terms of evidence. Guede was convicted on the same amount of evidence and less DNA evidence than Knox. From what I've read so far (although admittedly not much), it seems that Alberto Stasi was convicted on noticeably less evidence than Knox.
They can't even follow procedure, I mean who's to say that Cassation won't suddenly decide to hear the case on its evidence merits again, in some future case on the grounds that it feels like it?
At best, their courts come across as an arbitrary whimsical schizophrenic flip flopping incredibly incompetent and incredibly stupid body, with judges that are clowns, if one takes Cassation's report and the Hellman fiasco at face value and again, that's at best. At worst, they come across as simply corrupt, with no respect for justice or the rule of law and can't be counted on to protect their citizens, keep them safe or ensure that justice is done for victims. Justice is a game over there. Roll the dice to see if a defendant goes free because the structure and protocol of a three tiered system simply won't matter, as Cassation may arbitrarily decide to violate procedure and engage in pretzel logic, citation of non existent standards, the evident belief that absence of evidence is evidence of absence and flat out falsehoods, if it's in the mood.
And the discrepancy and paradox wrt other defendants convicted on much less evidence than whatever defendant Cassation decide to let walk, simply won't be an issue. Purely whimsical decisions for reasons that don't stand up to scrutiny. Italy's people deserve so much better than this.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2016 1:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Quote:

ETA: The trial was not delayed. The hearing was only to discuss the admissibility of the evidence as requested by the parties. The evidence has been admitted and so on March 3, 2017 there is the exam of the first two witnesses. GM will be the first witness.

What's the statutes of limitations on the charges? Didn't Andrea Vogt say 7.5 years, re Knox's parents, or am I wrong?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2016 5:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I don't remember what Andrea said, corpusvile, but according to this it's six years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_C ... imitations
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2016 6:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Quote:
[It is not enough that the criminal suit be started before the statute of limitations ran out: it is the definitive sentence that must be handed down before the term expires


^^ That doesn't sound good. Is the statutes from the time the crime was committed or from the time that the suspect is charged, does anyone know?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2016 9:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Not sure exactly -- it may be from the reported date of the crime -- but the combination of trials lasting up to a decade (with the court sitting only a few days a month, and with multiple automatic appeals allowed), plus the custom of allowing the statute of limitations to run even after proceedings are instituted until the final Cassation verdict, plus the lenient sentencing policy (the statute of limitations relating to the maximum sentence for the offence), means that anyone who can afford a long-form trial is almost certain to get away with any crime short of murder -- especially if the right people want that to happen. With murder itself, as we've seen, they have to use other methods to get favoured defendants off, but usually it's done by statute of limitations (as with Andreotti on the mafia-association charge). It's a farce, and not a very funny one.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 12:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I have little to add, beyond the observation that (IMO) 'the statute of limitations' cuts in some time after the alleged 'crime' took place.
Considering the cases brought about published material (Honor Bound and Waiting to be Heard), whether the publication date in the English language 'starts the clock', or whether the availability to the Italian public is a consideration - I have no idea.
In the case of Honor Bound, (given that the accuracy of translations seems to developed some legs), this is less clear (IMO), - but the case against Gumbel and Solly includes vilipendio - that's penal code.
The Waiting case (I think) is civil code, thus (I think) there are different 'time limitations'.
Anyway - I am with corpus on this one - none of these cases will ever get resolved: brushing under the carpet is the name of the game. It's almost - no, completely - impossible that any Judge could 'misinterpret' the cassation instruction to close the door on this whole episode.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 2:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SOL is from time complainant became aware of, or reasonably should have become aware of (as in being published in Italy or provided with an Italian translation :)

But agree the consensus powers that be message to sweep things under.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 6:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

But then, why Mignini tries knowing the system more then very well? Or does he want to make this judicial shame longer present in the public? I think of his charges ag. Maori, where he also openly criticize Cassazione? He is so clever and though he spends time and energy to do so. Is it just a fight ag. the famous "windmills"?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 7:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I'm speculating here but if Mignini doesn't press charges, then by implication he's tacitly accepting Sollecitos accusation of his offering of a deal. If it's brushed under, then it's another example highlighted regarding the judiciary there and how it really works.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 12:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

A prosecutor is obliged to press charges in Italy; there is no discretion to choose not to, like here in NSW.

In practice, the discretionary elbow room is deciding when to prosecute: really low-priority stuff could come to prosecution stage with a request to archive the file (equivalent to a nolle prosequi, in our terms), because, say, it is effectively time-barred.



There's a site, by the way, where you plug in the offence, two other parameters I think, and whether there was aggravation, and it gives you the expiry date of the crime (and of the sentence, if I remember correctly).
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 1:42 pm   Post subject: KNOX VS ITALY   

The European Court sent a request for information to Knox's attorney Carlo dalla Vedova (in French only) on April 29 (just published on the HUDOC site)

INFORMATION REQUEST

1. The applicant is requested to produce a copy of the judgment of the Perugia court of 5 December 2009 regarding his conviction for false accusation and a copy of the appeal and of the appeal regarding this procedure.

2. The parties are invited to indicate whether the judgment of the Florence Court of 14 January 2016 was attacked or if it has become final and to provide copies of relevant documents.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. The applicant has she exhausted the domestic remedies available to him to complain about the violation of Article 3 of the Convention, concerning the steps (scappellotti) allegedly suffered, and Articles 6 §§ 1 and 3 a), c) and e) and 8 of the Convention?

2. If so:

a) Was the applicant submitted, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, to inhuman or degrading treatment?

b) Was the applicant, as required by Article 6 § 3 a) of the Convention, informed promptly, in a language they understand and in detail, of the nature and cause of the charge against him for false accusation?

c) Does the applicant have had the assistance of counsel of his choice, as required by Article 6 § 3 c) of the Convention, especially during interrogation of 6 November 2007?

d) Has the applicant obtained the free assistance of an interpreter, within the meaning of Article 6 § 3 e) of the Convention?

e) The psychological pressure allegedly suffered by the applicant during interrogations of 6 November 2007, has that violated the right of the latter to a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, and the right to respect for private life protected by Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?

Note: This is a request for information from the applicant, the first stage of the review process before it is transmitted to Italy for response..
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 3:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

So they're gonna hear her alleged rights violation case? Lol. Unbelievable.
I have a weird feeling that this could potentially backfire on Knox.
Thanks Catnip, for your clarification re prosecution discretion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jamie


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:42 pm

Posts: 133

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 6:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hopefully, the ECHR will put this canard to bed once and for all.

'Taps to the head' = torture? Where is the evidence? Did she see a doctor?

Compared to what happened to the victim, this has to be a piss take.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 7:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
So they're gonna hear her alleged rights violation case? Lol. Unbelievable.


They're asking about the presence of counsel, rather overlooking or pre-empting the question of whether, being conducted at the police station, it was a custodial or 'suspect' interview, even though Knox was there voluntarily without invitation and you do not normally (though you may if you like) retain counsel for a witness interview with police, and she could not incriminate herself in the matter under investigation anyway. So round and round it all goes yet again.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 10:56 pm   Post subject: KNOX VS ITALY   

Further notes on this, hopefully it will stop the cartwheels in certain quarters:

The complaint was admitted to the court in 2013, not just now: KNOX c. ITALIE
PREMIÈRE SECTION
Requête no 76577/13
Amanda Marie KNOX
contre l’Italie
introduite le 24 novembre 2013

(In French because the court's two official languages are English and French)

It is still in the hearing process for admissibility. Note that a request for information was sent to her attorney, not the state of Italy.

A large number of cases are still rejected at this level.

There are a few typos in the document Florence Court ruling 2016? :)

ETA: It is a level 3, i.e. low priority case review so may take a while to resolve :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 11:14 pm   Post subject: KNOX VS ITALY   

Response from Machiavelli, reprinted with his kind permission:
Quote:
My quick answers to the ECHR questions:
1. The applicant: has she exhausted the domestic remedies available to him to complain about the violation of Article 3 of the Convention, concerning the steps (scappellotti) allegedly suffered, and Articles 6 §§ 1 and 3 a), c) and e) and 8 of the Convention?

No.

In fact, the applicant did not even initiate the process to seek a remedy through Italian law.
The point is particularly relevant not only because of the obvious status of inadmissibility of the application before the ECHR (no domestic remedy was attempted), but also as for its probative value as for assessing the credibility of the version of facts provided by the applicant.

This is because of the following legal provisions under Italian law: a) the crimes of beating (cp 581), or physical violence or threat (cp. 610-612) require the victim to file a complaint in order to allow prosecution of the charge, otherwise investigation cannot initiate; b) the Ethics Code of lawyers requires a defence attorney to file a charge if he/she collects a claim by a client under detention, and to properly inform the client about the necessity to file a complaint; c) if a lawyer is informed by a client under detention that the same client suffered a violence or offence by authorities, and does not take proper legal steps, the lawyer would commit an extremely serious criminal offence called "infedele patrocinio" (betrayal of the interest of client) besides breaching the Ethics Code; d) a defence attorney is also required to object any irregularity of breach of the code that could be suffered by the client, namely, in the particular case, if the applicants current claims had been made at the tiem, the lawyers shoud have denounced the breach of Procedure Code claiming that a prosecution interrogation had taken place (thus, that would mean breaching the Procedure code that prevents prosecution from questioning a suspect prior to his/her appearence before a judge), but the defence attorney never raised such claim.
Therefore, the failure to initiate procedure for domestic remedy by the applicant on this claim, not only causes the request to be inadmissible on this point, but also undermines any possible credibility of the claim itself.

2. If so:

a) Does the applicant have been submitted, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, inhuman or degrading treatment?

It is impossible to know for certain whether she received a slap at the back of her head, while it is impossible to prove it. There is actually no element of evidence in support of that besides the applicant's writing, while there are elements tat indicate the opposite, that is: the defences' failure to make the necessary step for complain and initiate a process to investigate the claim; the testimony of interpreter Anna Donnino who was present at the police interrogation, a reliable witness who denies any mistreatment ever took place in her presence.

b) The applicant she has, as required by Article 6 § 3 a) of the Convention, was informed in promptly, in a language they understand and in detail, of the nature and cause of the charge against him for false accusation?

Yes, the charge for false accusation anyway was issued much later. She was not a suspect for that crime at the time of the interrogation nor in the following days.

c) Does the applicant have had the assistance of counsel of his choice, as required by Article 6 § 3 c) of the Convention, especially during interrogation of 6 November 2007?

No interrogation took place on 6 November 2007 (except the police questioning that ended at 01.45 am).
Had interrogation taken place later that day, it would have been illegal. Knox's defence should have raised a complaint to the court immediately if that happened. They never raised such claim.

d) Has the applicant obtained the free assistance of an interpreter, within the meaning of Article 6 § 3 e) of the Convention?

Yes, she had an interpreter, but the applicant was not suspected of that charge at the time, and was not undergoing an interrogation, but only a police questioning which is inadmissible as testimony in court, therefore she was not in the condition of being entitled to have an interpreter in the meaning of Art. 6 of the Convention (which refers to papers usable in a court).

e) The psychological pressure allegedly suffered by the applicant during interrogations of 6 November 2007, she has violated the right of the latter to a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, and the right to respect for private life protected by Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?

The applicant later in court she claimed of having suffered of a False Memory Syndrome.

It needs to be pointed out that there was only one interrogation reported in trial papers, that lasted overall a time between 22.30 and 01.45, that is three hours.

The final judgements of Cassazione deposited in 2013 and 2015 point out that the calunnia committed by the applicant was a prolonged behaviour, that she committed on multiple occasions, and that the statement she released on Nov. 6 recorded on paper by a prosecutor at the presence of an interpreter, was a spontaneous statement, not an interrogation (and as said, the applicant's defence position was to not claim there was any prosecution's interrogation).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2016 10:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I don't think the reference to the 2016 judgement is a typo - I believe it refers to the callunia accusation of Knox against Mignini and others (that she was hit) and the court decided she hadn't badmouthed them. (She got off).

The ECtHR is asking for details of this case. Here's a press report from the time, and I'm sure it was well discussed on this board (if I knew how to link to a post I'd do it!)

http://www.ilmessaggero.it/umbria/i_pol ... 82506.html
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2016 4:15 pm   Post subject: KNOX VS ITALY   

You're right, Sallyoo, thanks.

"entre-temps, la requérante fit l’objet d’une autre procédure pénale pour dénonciation calomnieuse, concernant notamment les déclarations qu’elle avait rendues les 13 mars, 12 et 13 juin 2009 à l’encontre des agents de police ayant procédé à ses interrogatoires. Par un jugement du 14 janvier 2016, le tribunal de Florence acquitta la requérante."

"meantime, the applicant was the subject of other criminal proceedings for false accusation, especially concerning statements she had made on 13 March, 12 and 13 June 2009 against the police officers who carried out his interrogations. In a judgment of 14 January 2016, the Florence court acquitted the applicant."

Still, the court also asks,

"2. The parties are invited to indicate whether the judgment of the Florence Court of 14 January 2016 was attacked or if it has become final and to provide copies of relevant documents."

The circus continues.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2016 4:31 pm   Post subject: CCTV VIDEOS   

The Meredith Kercher Wiki has uploaded a large trove of never before seen CCTV video captures from parking garage cameras 7, 11, 15.

Many thanks to the editors who compiled and uploaded that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2016 9:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

For the sake of completeness, one more interview with Raffaele Sollecito (published on April 29):

Sollecito: “A short-circuit justice-information”
By Luigi Iorio

"You do not need much imagination to realize that my life was turned upside down. Eight years of judicial harassment, five judgments to reach the truth. Namely, my innocence. A life that was changed, not the night of the murder of the poor Meredith. That night for me, nothing had happened. I was quietly at home. Everything changed, however, when I was arrested. I lost my day-to-day routine, years of study at university, my dreams, my plans for life ".

What is your opinion of the Italian judiciary and the Italian justice? What do you think of the investigation and the trial against you?

Justice in Italy is creating major problems. For example, I was literally targeted by investigators immediately. They conducted hasty and erroneous investigation. Then also, in the light of the blatant investigative amnesia, they continued all the way to try to prove their theory and spread (broadcast) it worldwide.

A thirst for conclusion / closure at all costs. Instantly find a scapegoat to affirm that the State was there to solve a crime. The most absurd thing was the press conference by the Commissioner of Police of Perugia within hours of the incident, with investigation still ongoing. On that occasion, the Commissioner said: "we have the culprits". Raffaele Sollecito, Amanda Knox and Patrick Lumumba; all three turned out to be innocent. A murder, according to police, occurred at the end of an orgy gone wrong. Only fantasies. Meredith died at the hands of one man after a bungled robbery. They failed to keep investigation wide open and continue in accordance with the constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence. For them I was guilty. [According to them] I smoked pot and drank alcohol and had a psychological subjection to Amanda. This was enough to be guilty. Here are these falsehoods that have distorted my image in the eyes of Italians who, before the crime, did not know anything about me.

You spoke of four years' imprisonment; where, in what prison and in what living conditions?

I was first imprisoned in the prison of Perugia and later in those of Terni and Montorio Veronese. Just after my arrest, I was immediately subjected to solitary confinement for my own safety to avoid possible repercussions from other inmates, because I was accused of a murder of a woman. Even worse, according to the prosecutor, after an orgy gone wrong.

That is, the state itself puts you in isolation, because it is aware that it cannot possibly protect you against other inmates.

I still think, after many years, that the prison itself is useless. The prison is a social landfill where an inmate is abandoned. A school of crime that generates crime and violence. The prison is always the same because public opinion and politics refuse to elaborate on the difficulties of detainees. Overcrowding is a plague. In a cell, you don't have your privacy, you can't study, read aloud etc It often creates a psychological imbalance. At night especially, there are hundreds of screaming men psychologically exhausted. Attempted suicides, aggression, in short, a world that I do not wish on anyone. On this topic I agree with Gherardo Colombo when he says that the majority of prisoners in Italy present no danger to society and therefore prison is superfluous. Precautionary measures should be halved and detention alternative to prison introduced.

How long did you remain in isolation?

Less than 6 months. I asked through my lawyers to withdraw (revoke) the restriction because I realized that I was losing my cognitive abilities. I would rather take my chances coming into contact with other inmates so as not to remain in a state of solitude.

Have you ever been the victim of acts of intimidation in prison by other inmates?

Fortunately, no. But only those who were in those places can perceive some unwritten rules. Inevitably, prison life divides and does not unite. Creating opposing groups, always competing for control of groups that are part of various associations in criminal mafia. If you do not submit to them, you are in trouble. If they decide that you are an "infamous" person, then you might get into trouble. But then again it's hard to explain if you've never experienced prison.

How did you spend the time and what did you think about?

I thought about many things. My affections, the many lies told about me, my reputation ruined. For me, it was a source of strength to wait for the phone call of my family, as per regulation for ten minutes each week. Then I started to commit my time to studying and taking a course in painting. Even the painting course was sometimes tiring due to a small lab almost as small as a cell. Cramped and badly lit.

What is the main thing that has marked this affair?

Not knowing what would become of my life. Ending my days in jail for a crime I did not commit. Think about the suffering that this miscarriage of justice was causing to my family, to my friends who have always believed in my values and my way of being.

Although by law 516 000 Euros is the maximum amount you may ask, do you think that is enough to compensate for the wrong you’ve suffered?

There is no figure that can compensate me for what I have suffered. But I do not deny that I need the money. It would serve well my family that has been consumed by legal costs (legal fees, consulting, transport, etc) and has spent one million three hundred thousand euro. In recent years, we have sold two apartments owned by us. Here, loss of income is one of many problems that are the result of this incident (affair.)

The fundamental fact is that justice is often of a 'class' nature, expensive and full of prejudices. You told us about exorbitant legal fees, but you had good lawyers. Do you think this has been a factor? An illegal immigrant or a person less wealthy would be acquitted?

I thank my lawyers, but I don’t think that having the financial ability to pay for good lawyers has been an advantage. Wealthy people don’t have an advantage before justice. People in general, whether they are immigrants, of whatever race, instead will be lucky when judged fairly. The real point is the lack (shortage) of justice. The prosecution is judgmental by nature; we hear news daily about satisfying the thirst for revenge of a public “executioner” (public opinion), who wants the monster on the front page. I think the first thing we should do is to allow journalists to get access to crime reports and proceedings at the end of the investigation without the consent of the prosecution, in order to avoid a power-marked position of a journalist. To this I’d add that, beyond the lawyers that defend you, the difference is made by the judges. There are judges who want to investigate the cases and those who are prejudiced and condemn you based on their own personal opinion.

What do you say to those people who still look on you with dismay?

I’d say inquire or, better yet, read the court papers. If you do not do so for lack of interest, but at the same time continue to accuse me, it would mean that I'm not interested in your judgment, either.

Plans for the future?

Firstly, I am promoting my book, thanks to which I am able to tell my story of injustice. It’s one way to understand how justice in Italy often fails, in the hope that certain things won’t happen again. As for my life plans, in a few weeks I will be presenting my portal: beonmemories.com, which I hope will become a solid job and perspective for my future.


AVANTI ONLINE
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2016 10:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

This was posted on Sollecito's FB a few weeks back:

Quote:
"...the secret of justice is in an ever greater humanity and in a more human closeness between lawyers and judges in the fight against pain."


Whaaat? Closeness between lawyers and judges? That's something "new." Is he hinting at the "closeness" / "collaboration" between his lawyers and the Cassazione judges? ;) That they were in cahoots together in order to achieve his acquittal? To reduce his "pain"? Just trying to guess what he meant to say by posting this ...
Top Profile 

Offline Rumpole


Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:46 pm

Posts: 241

Location: Old Bailey

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 9:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

In connection with the recent ECHR communique, went to have a look at what other boards including international skeptics' one are discussing and found there a recommended link -"Those interested in the judgments of the ECHR against Italy might find the following site useful" - to this page:

https://www.giustizia.it/giustizia/it/m ... ge=mg_14_7

and the first judgment against Italy I look at is really a judgement against the not so law-abiding beloved native country of AK - so yes, I'm finding this extremely useful as it is. Italian state should pay €115,000 damages to Abu Omar and his wife for what the Americans did to this guy - kidnapped, tortured, waterboarded etc. and then these Americans expect AK to receive compensation for two possible slaps on the head and a scary interview/ interrogation? Right. Justice the American way, I suppose. One law for them, and another for the rest of the world, which really doesn't matter at all, after all the Americans are the masters of the mankind and are currently busy trying to get yet another war started, this time with Russia in Europe, possibly - in worst case scenarios resulting in a nuclear winter and an uninhabitable planet.

Offtopic: Re the war: see for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWsOHJ9MGE0 and/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeH_-aezzuI or https://audioboom.com/boos/4580137-nato ... rd-com?t=0

I guess the 1% and the military-industrial folks need more money (where will they spend it if they wreck the planet, one just wonders, but I guess they are no giants brain-wise):

Manlio Dinucci shows this page

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74003606/

and asks: "Chi a detto che la guerra non paga?"


http://ilmanifesto.info/escalation-nucleare-in-europa/

And back to the topic

Abu Omar judgment in Italian:
https://www.giustizia.it/giustizia/it/m ... SDU1224703

In French original, no English translation available:

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{"documentcollectionid2":["GRANDCHAMBER","CHAMBER"]}
On the above hudoc page search case number 44883/09

International Law in Brief has this in English:

Quote:
On February 23, 2016, the European Court of Human Rights ruled (judgment only available in French) that that the CIA’s abduction and extrajudicial transfer to Egypt of imam Abu Omar violated the European Convention on Human Rights. According to the press release, the case concerned the extrajudicial transfer of Egyptian imam Abu Omar, from Italy to Egypt, effected by CIA agents with the cooperation of Italian authorities. Omar, who had been under investigation for ties to radical Islamist groups in Italy, was detained in secrecy for several months and stated he was interrogated and tortured at regular intervals. According to a news report, Italian courts convicted twenty-six Americans in absentia in the case, but Italy’s justice ministry never pursued their extradition. Italy’s highest court quashed the convictions of five Italian military agents on grounds of “state secrecy.” The Court ruled that Italy had violated Article 3 of the Convention, because “the executive’s decision to apply State secrecy to information” that had been widely publicized in the media “had clearly been applied in order to ensure that those responsible did not have to answer for their actions.” Regarding the U.S. agents, the Court determined that the Italian government had never sought their extradition, and had pardoned three of the convicted persons. The Court further ruled that Italy’s cooperation with the U.S. “extraordinary rendition” operation exposed Abu Omar “to a serious and foreseeable risk of ill-treatment and of conditions of detention contrary to Article 3 of the Convention,” and noted that under the Convention “Italian authorities had . . . a duty to take the appropriate measures to ensure that the persons within their jurisdiction were not subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The Court further agreed with the Italian lower court’s findings that Omar “had been subjected from the outset to unacknowledged detention in complete disregard of the guarantees enshrined in Article 5 of the Convention,” and ruled that Italy was responsible for his “abduction and to the entire period of detention following his handover to the US authorities.”

https://www.asil.org/blogs/european-cou ... l-transfer

Btw America's best and brightest i.e. the international skeptics s still don't seem to understand the nature of ECHR: "Note, however, that under no circumstances will the Court set aside a national court’s decision. "

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Your_ ... on_ENG.pdf

In case of a judgment against Italy for a violation of say, the right to have a lawyer during that interrogation I think AK would receive something like €3000 for compensation but the calunnia decision would not be changed. I've always been of the opinion that the ECHR court would have a look at the case but can't see them agreeing that much with her complaints.

The Abu Omar judgment against Italy in google translation:
Quote:
Default interest

352. The Court considers it appropriate to base the default interest rate on the interest rate on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY

1. Rejects the objections raised by the Government;
 
2. Declares the application admissible;
 
3. Holds that there has been a violation of procedural and material aspects of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the applicant;
 
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 of the Convention on account of the overall period of the applicant's detention;
 
5. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of the applicant;
 
6. Holds that there has been a violation of procedural and material aspects of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the applicant;
 
7. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of the applicant;
 
8. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 taken in conjunction with Articles 3, 5 and 8 of the Convention in respect of the applicant and a violation of Article 13 taken together with Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention in respect of the applicant;
 
9. Holds that it is not necessary to examine separately the complaint under Article 6 of the Convention;
 
10. Holds
a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months from the date the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the following amounts:
i) 70 000 EUR (seventy thousand euros) to the applicant, plus any tax that may be chargeable to tax for non-pecuniary damage;
ii) 15 000 (fifteen thousand euros) to the applicant, plus any tax that may be chargeable to tax for non-pecuniary damage;
iii) 30 000 EUR (thirty thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable by the applicants as a tax, for costs and expenses;
b) that from the expiry of that period until settlement, these amounts shall be payable on simple interest at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the period, plus three percentage points;
 
11. Dismisses the claim for just satisfaction for the surplus.
Done in French, and notified by 23 February 2016, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
              Françoise Elens-PassosGeorge Nicolaou
GreffièrePrésident
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 6:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
I'm speculating here but if Mignini doesn't press charges, then by implication he's tacitly accepting Sollecitos accusation of his offering of a deal. If it's brushed under, then it's another example highlighted regarding the judiciary there and how it really works.


Hi C-V. I'm not sure if I understand this.

The "offer of a deal" thing described in the book exploded in Sollecito's face on national TV almost immediately. Sollecito's own father was reduced to saying that the claim was invented. It never happened.

Mignini doesnt "press charges" in these cases, he files complaints, and prosecutors then takes over and decide if THEY want to press charges. Thats now happening in the Maori case.

We have long known what the selected charges are, they are described here and the lie about a deal is among them.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _targeted/

Mignini cant do deals in the US sense except very early in any trial process, thereafter the presiding magistrate firms up the charges and they are locked in until trial.

He could have done a deal (reduced his request for charges) in December 2007 after the interview with Knox but she acted brainless and pathetic and her opportunity slipped away.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _14_third/

Guede offered to testify at trial in 2009 but Mignini turned him down. No deal.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 6:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I thought Mignini HAS sued Sollecito /Gumbel for stating in Honor Bound he was offered a deal?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 7:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Fast Pete wrote:
corpusvile wrote:
I'm speculating here but if Mignini doesn't press charges, then by implication he's tacitly accepting Sollecitos accusation of his offering of a deal. If it's brushed under, then it's another example highlighted regarding the judiciary there and how it really works.


Hi C-V. I'm not sure if I understand this.

The "offer of a deal" thing described in the book exploded in Sollecito's face on national TV almost immediately. Sollecito's own father was reduced to saying that the claim was invented. It never happened.

Mignini doesnt "press charges" in these cases, he files complaints, and prosecutors then takes over and decide if THEY want to press charges. Thats now happening in the Maori case.

We have long known what the selected charges are, they are described here and the lie about a deal is among them.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _targeted/

Mignini cant do deals in the US sense except very early in any trial process, thereafter the presiding magistrate firms up the charges and they are locked in until trial.

He could have done a deal (reduced his request for charges) in December 2007 after the interview with Knox but she acted brainless and pathetic and her opportunity slipped away.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _14_third/

Guede offered to testify at trial in 2009 but Mignini turned him down. No deal.



Thanks for the clarification Pete. I had forgotten that a prosecutor is obliged to investigate a crime, hence my earlier response to Elisa, so it was more of a misunderstanding on my part.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 7:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
I thought Mignini HAS sued Sollecito /Gumbel for stating in Honor Bound he was offered a deal?

Wouldn't that fall under penal though, as Sally said, if deal making is illegal that late in the due process, in Italy? Wouldn't that be broadly the equivalent of Calunnia, or falsely accusing someone of illegality, while knowing they were innocent?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 7:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Anything that would lead to a felony conviction, yes, cv, except that is 6 yrs for definitive conviction as various posts at PMF (passim) may have said. Not much time left for that, sadly.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 7:45 pm   Post subject: PRESS RELEASE RE DISPLAY OF MEREDITH KERCHER'S BODY   

Press release posted at TMOMK Wiki: For The Press May 20, 2016: "Amanda Knox supporter Lyn Duncan of New Zealand posts nude pictures of Meredith Kercher's body that had been released to Italian TV by the defense at Twitter account [1] Dougall Tweets & Replies. Despite repeated complaints to Twitter, no action has been taken over this disrespectful display of a murder victim."

Note this is the same Lyn Duncan who tweeted pictures of a Vaseline jar to the Kerchers and while it might be seen as the actions of a single loonie she also pleaded with Bruce Fischer to "release pictures of Meredith's body" which the defense had provided to Italian TV.

Amanda Knox and her supporters need to be very ashamed of their actions.

And while I have been one of many calling for civility on all sides and an end to the needless wars (I stopped commenting on the case at Twitter) this is inflammatory and beyond all decency.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 7:48 pm   Post subject: Re: KNOX VS ITALY   

Ergon wrote:

It is still in the hearing process for admissibility. Note that a request for information was sent to her attorney, not the state of Italy.

A large number of cases are still rejected at this level.



The questionnaire is addressed to 'the parties', so it goes to the Italian government as well. But the question as to whether domestic remedies have been exhausted, an essential condition for admissibility by the Strasbourg court, means the case hasn't been admitted yet. It may well be, but that doesn't seem to have happened at this point.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sallyoo


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 96

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 10:39 pm   Post subject: Re: PRESS RELEASE RE DISPLAY OF MEREDITH KERCHER'S BODY   

Ergon wrote:
Press release posted at TMOMK Wiki: For The Press May 20, 2016: "Amanda Knox supporter Lyn Duncan of New Zealand posts nude pictures of Meredith Kercher's body that had been released to Italian TV by the defense at Twitter account [1] Dougall Tweets & Replies. Despite repeated complaints to Twitter, no action has been taken over this disrespectful display of a murder victim."

Note this is the same Lyn Duncan who tweeted pictures of a Vaseline jar to the Kerchers and while it might be seen as the actions of a single loonie she also pleaded with Bruce Fischer to "release pictures of Meredith's body" which the defense had provided to Italian TV.

Amanda Knox and her supporters need to be very ashamed of their actions.

And while I have been one of many calling for civility on all sides and an end to the needless wars (I stopped commenting on the case at Twitter) this is inflammatory and beyond all decency.


I agree the tweet was beyond all decency (I saw the tweet plus the photo), but as far as I know it was taken down within hours (maybe even more quickly). At least three tweeters alerted twitter, but whether it was twitter who deleted it, or whether it was the vile creature who had posted it - if she had thought better of it, (or if perhaps one of her 'minders' had instructed her to delete it) - I can't know.

But this 'out of control' tweeter is also posting 'outing' tweets including (I assume genuine) photos of a person she has 'fingered' which include a child.

Maybe you think I'm being overly charitable here, (because there are also some 'guilter' tweeters who I abhor), but my opinion is that this "Dougall" (once known as Annella) is a rogue - (with her 38! followers), and she is as much an embarrassment to the FOA as she is repulsive to us.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 2:33 am   Post subject: ECtHR   

From the European Court of Human Rights
Quote:
25: What are the different stages of the proceedings before the Court?

There are two main stages in the consideration of cases brought before the Court: the admissibility stage and the merits stage (i.e. the examination of the complaints). The processing of an application also goes through different phases.

A single-judge formation will declare an application inadmissible where inadmissibility is clear from the outset; its decisions cannot be appealed against.

A Committee will give a final decision or judgment in a case which is covered by well-established case-law of the Court.

A Chamber will give notice of the case to the respondent Government for their observations. Written observations are submitted by both parties. The Court then decides if it is appropriate to hold a public hearing in the case, but this remains exceptional in relation to the number of applications examined. Ultimately, the Chamber delivers a judgment that will become final only after the expiry of a three-month period during which the applicant or Government may request the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber for fresh consideration.

If the request for referral is accepted by the panel of the Grand Chamber, the case will be reconsidered and a public hearing will be held if necessary. The Grand Chamber judgment will be final.

26: What are the conditions of admissibility?

Applications must meet certain requirements if they are to be declared admissible by the Court; otherwise the complaints will not even be examined.

Cases can only be brought to the Court after domestic remedies have been exhausted; in other words, individuals complaining of violations of their rights must first have taken their case through the courts of the country concerned, up to the highest possible level of jurisdiction. In this way the State itself is first given an opportunity to provide redress for the alleged violation at national level.

An applicant’s allegations must concern one or more of the rights defined in the Convention. The Court cannot examine complaints concerning violations of any other rights.

Applications must also be lodged with the Court within six months following the last judicial decision in the case, which will usually be a judgment by the highest court in the country concerned.

The applicant must be, personally and directly, a victim of a violation of the Convention, and must have suffered a significant disadvantage.

It should not be forgotten, of course, that applications can only be lodged against one or more of the States Parties to the Convention, and not against any other State or against an individual.

So therefore it is still in the examination phase, and the state of Italy has not even had a chance to respond. Early days.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 4:07 pm   Post subject: Re: PRESS RELEASE RE DISPLAY OF MEREDITH KERCHER'S BODY   

Sallyoo wrote:

I agree the tweet was beyond all decency (I saw the tweet plus the photo), but as far as I know it was taken down within hours (maybe even more quickly). At least three tweeters alerted twitter, but whether it was twitter who deleted it, or whether it was the vile creature who had posted it - if she had thought better of it, (or if perhaps one of her 'minders' had instructed her to delete it) - I can't know.

But this 'out of control' tweeter is also posting 'outing' tweets including (I assume genuine) photos of a person she has 'fingered' which include a child.

Maybe you think I'm being overly charitable here, (because there are also some 'guilter' tweeters who I abhor), but my opinion is that this "Dougall" (once known as Annella) is a rogue - (with her 38! followers), and she is as much an embarrassment to the FOA as she is repulsive to us.

Dougall used to have quite a following as Annella, Sallyoo. And they applauded her as she harassed the Kerchers once too often. I see her tweet to you https://twitter.com/zebbidi975/status/7 ... 4926872576 in which she justifies showing Meredith's body didn't get any likes from her gang of enablers so perhaps they're afraid of being associated with that. But it was the culture of harassment that permeated the FOA and reached its height with the Sfarzo affair, then continued with many pictures of 'outed' individuals (and children) being posted by "MichaelB" on Fischer's site which then migrated to the "KnoxHaterTrolls" site which showed what we were dealing with.

More than one crazed fan, er, rogue who are now distancing themselves.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 4:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

A counter-petition was launched recently in response to calls to keep Sollecito off TV. His supporters set a very modest goal for themselves: first, only 100 signatures; now they are aiming to have 200. It currently has 133 signatures. ;)

The petition, set up by Anna Rotundo, states:

YES to Raffaele Sollecito as justice expert on Tgcom24 or the right to innocence

Dear Director,

Raffaele Sollecito was finally declared innocent by Italian law and has the right to be considered innocent, and the others have the duty to consider him as such. Yet there is someone who has questioned this.

In fact, a petition was launched which aims to prevent him from participating as a commentator in the TV show "This Week’s Mystery"; she continues, in fact, to consider him guilty of murder from which he has already been acquitted. [I guess AR means Simona Miceli, the initiator of the first change.org petition. - G.]

The stain of guilt, washed away by the judgments with the right tools, is rather indelible in the hearts (minds) of some people.

Amanda Knox in the United States, even before being acquitted definitively, had been reinserted socially so as to become a [regular] contributor to a prestigious magazine such as the "West Seattle Herald". [Emphasis mine. - G.] In Italy, however, not even the final acquittal allows that Sollecito is considered innocent.

And it’s a sad mirror reflection of the barbaric side of Italy where hatred can overwhelm any reasonableness.

This petition not only defends the right of Raffaele Sollecito to express himself but defends the right to innocence that concerns all of us.

In fact, any citizen could be crushed by the machinery of justice and be denied, once acquitted, the right to an authentic rehabilitation.

Raffaele Sollecito has the right to participate in a television program like any citizen; not only is he without fault, but the community should feel in debt to those who have paid a high price for suffering an unjust accusation.

We do not know if Sollecito will be suitable in the role of justice expert and it is not, in fact, the subject of this petition. His eventual success will depend on his skills and public feedback.

However, we are sure that he can’t be prevented from participating on the basis of a presumption of guilt that even a final judgment has been able to erase.

If, on this basis, he were prevented from taking part, he would be denied a universal right: the right to innocence.

Therefore, with this petition we hope that you will confirm the decision to have him as a guest in your television program.

Anna Rotundo


CHANGE.ORG COUNTER-PETITION

------------------------------------

I had a good laugh over this part: "Amanda Knox ... had been reinserted socially so as to become a [regular] contributor [collaborator with] to a prestigious magazine such as the "West Seattle Herald". :)
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 6:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Raffaele Sollecito has no significant support among the public and despite his efforts to generate some headlines to help start his new business, the reactions were overwhelmingly negative.

I saw a few announcements on social media for his press conference and they were largely ignored. None I have seen received a like or a retweet. Sollecito's official Twitter account linked to his business @BeOnMemories has 6 whole followers. Says it all really.

A quick look at his new website confirms the launch was premature. The "About Us" page still displays sample text instead of a meaningful and informative objective of his company. It is signed with "John Doe - Some important guy". A number of pages have been translated into English and can be displayed in either Italian or English, some have not been translated and can only be viewed in Italian. One page is displayed in Italian and English on one and the same page. A half-assed job.

"Stiamo Crescendo" has been translated as "We are growing up". A growing business is not the same as growing up, but hey, except us I doubt anyone will notice.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 6:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thanks Nell. Yeah, he is not very thorough or precise when it comes to describing his new business. He is more interested in promoting his book. That job is easier: he just needs to repeat the same old stories over and over again.

Have you heard this news already? It's the first time that I read it: Amanda Knox is following in Raffaele Sollecito's footsteps.

May 18, 2016

Knox asks for compensation for detention
For one year, "asks the maximum", announces her lawyer

Amanda Knox will ask the Italian State to be compensated for the wrongful imprisonment suffered in the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher, which ended with her and Raffaele Sollecito’s acquittal. Said to ANSA one of her defenders, the lawyer Carlo Dalla Vedova.

"The request [for compensation] - explained the lawyer - is almost ready and will be filed shortly. We will ask the maximum (over 500 thousand euro) for the unjust detention and the consequential damage suffered." For Knox, the unjust detention concerns only one of almost four years in prison. For the other three, the conviction for slander against Patrick Lumumba has indeed become definitive. Judgment for which the American has turned to the European Court of Human Rights.

A [similar] request for compensation for the nearly four years of unjust detention was lodged with the Court of Appeal of Florence, also from Sollecito’s lawyers. He also asks for a payout of over half a million euro.


ANSA (PUGLIA)
Top Profile 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 7:00 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Ergon wrote:
From the European Court of Human Rights
Quote:
25: What are the different stages of the proceedings before the Court?

There are two main stages in the consideration of cases brought before the Court: the admissibility stage and the merits stage (i.e. the examination of the complaints). The processing of an application also goes through different phases.

A single-judge formation will declare an application inadmissible where inadmissibility is clear from the outset; its decisions cannot be appealed against.

A Committee will give a final decision or judgment in a case which is covered by well-established case-law of the Court.

A Chamber will give notice of the case to the respondent Government for their observations. Written observations are submitted by both parties. The Court then decides if it is appropriate to hold a public hearing in the case, but this remains exceptional in relation to the number of applications examined. Ultimately, the Chamber delivers a judgment that will become final only after the expiry of a three-month period during which the applicant or Government may request the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber for fresh consideration.

If the request for referral is accepted by the panel of the Grand Chamber, the case will be reconsidered and a public hearing will be held if necessary. The Grand Chamber judgment will be final.

26: What are the conditions of admissibility?

Applications must meet certain requirements if they are to be declared admissible by the Court; otherwise the complaints will not even be examined.

Cases can only be brought to the Court after domestic remedies have been exhausted; in other words, individuals complaining of violations of their rights must first have taken their case through the courts of the country concerned, up to the highest possible level of jurisdiction. In this way the State itself is first given an opportunity to provide redress for the alleged violation at national level.

An applicant’s allegations must concern one or more of the rights defined in the Convention. The Court cannot examine complaints concerning violations of any other rights.

Applications must also be lodged with the Court within six months following the last judicial decision in the case, which will usually be a judgment by the highest court in the country concerned.

The applicant must be, personally and directly, a victim of a violation of the Convention, and must have suffered a significant disadvantage.

It should not be forgotten, of course, that applications can only be lodged against one or more of the States Parties to the Convention, and not against any other State or against an individual.

So therefore it is still in the examination phase, and the state of Italy has not even had a chance to respond. Early days.


Distinctly early. First, the court has asked for the text of the Massei judgement and all subsequent appeals, which have to be translated into English or French. Second, the court is not yet satisfied that Knox has exhausted domestic remedies on either her Art.3 complaint (abusive questioning) or her Art.6 complaint (unfair trial). Knox of course has launched no legal action of her own in Italy, and her lawyers even told the press on the Art.3 matter, 'We never said she was hit.' And the police action against her for her remarks on the stand (which shouldn't have happened, because Italy ought to recognise court privilege) has failed at first instance, but the judgement hasn't been finalised. So that whole thing could get technical and time-consuming, possibly.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 9:09 pm   Post subject: ECtHR   

Still depends on the Minister of Justice telling the court why the referral has no merit, hugo. Will they mount a proper defense or will they cave? I think the greatest danger might come from how they rule when she became a suspect and when she was given access to a lawyer. They have 90 days to respond.

Two invaluable resources for any one researching this would be Summary of Italian Judicial system
and
Rules of the European Court of Human Rights

Since I am not aware the January 14, 2016 Florence Court ruling against the cops being appealed that ruling would now be final. That, and the language of Marasca-Bruno, which went out of the way to confirm 'psychological pressures', might well turn out to be an Italian end goal. (ETA: I meant to say 'own' goal, lol, but 'end goal' might also be applicable, if the goal was to poison the well on behalf the accused).

Just saying.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 10:34 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Ergon wrote:
Still depends on the Minister of Justice telling the court why the referral has no merit, hugo. Will they mount a proper defense or will they cave? I think the greatest danger might come from how they rule when she became a suspect and when she was given access to a lawyer. They have 90 days to respond.

Two invaluable resources for any one researching this would be Summary of Italian Judicial system
and
Rules of the European Court of Human Rights

Since I am not aware the January 14, 2016 Florence Court ruling against the cops being appealed that ruling would now be final. That, and the language of Marasca-Bruno, which went out of the way to confirm 'psychological pressures', might well turn out to be an Italian end goal.

Just saying.


I've been trying to learn more about this case and found your forum.

Does your last paragraph indicate that you think The European Court of Human Rights will rule for Amanda Knox? Also, regarding the question of her being a suspect, I though I'd read that she wasn't at the time she accused Patrick Lumumba, that she just made a voluntary confession and therefore wasn't entitled to a lawyer. So, I don't understand this question of psychological pressure, which I'm guessing applies to this issue.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 3:02 am   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Midwichcuckoo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Still depends on the Minister of Justice telling the court why the referral has no merit, hugo. Will they mount a proper defense or will they cave? I think the greatest danger might come from how they rule when she became a suspect and when she was given access to a lawyer. They have 90 days to respond.

Two invaluable resources for any one researching this would be Summary of Italian Judicial system
and
Rules of the European Court of Human Rights

Since I am not aware the January 14, 2016 Florence Court ruling against the cops being appealed that ruling would now be final. That, and the language of Marasca-Bruno, which went out of the way to confirm 'psychological pressures', might well turn out to be an Italian end goal.

Just saying.

I've been trying to learn more about this case and found your forum.

Does your last paragraph indicate that you think The European Court of Human Rights will rule for Amanda Knox? Also, regarding the question of her being a suspect, I though I'd read that she wasn't at the time she accused Patrick Lumumba, that she just made a voluntary confession and therefore wasn't entitled to a lawyer. So, I don't understand this question of psychological pressure, which I'm guessing applies to this issue.

Hi, Midwichcuckoo, and welcome to the forum.

I suggested that possibility, sure, though I've avoided saying what I think will actually happen ever since my involvement in the case. The question before the court is whether she received a fair trial on the charge of calunnia against Patrick Lumumba. What will decide it IMO is whether her 'confession' was coerced whether through slap on head or suggestion and whether she should have been advised of her right to a lawyer. Since she did have a translator with her the question of her ability to understand the charges might not be so important.

Per TMOMK Wiki Admissibility of the statements
Quote:
The Supreme Court would rule that the original statements would not be admissible. The Supreme Court concluded that Knox was a suspect before she made those statements and that she should have been treated as a suspect as soon as Raffaele stopped corroborating the alibi and admitted to lying at Amanda's request. Amanda never asked for a lawyer[*18] but under Italian law the police should have prompted her to get one. These statements would be admissible against Amanda Knox for her charges of falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba but not against Knox for the murder. The spontaneous statement made by Knox out of her own choosing would be admissible.[19]

[*18] Sky News
Quote:
An American held in connection with the murder of British student Meredith Kercher has claimed she did not realise Italian police were questioning her as a suspect.
Amanda Knox, 20, has also alleged she was told that having a lawyer present at the time would have "made things worse for her".

I would have liked to see her signature on the English transcripts.

I would have liked to see in writing she was advised of her right to a lawyer and she waived it.

It is up to the Italian Minister of Justice to provide an adequate defense though I wonder if they have the political will to do that, and whether the Hellmann, Marasca and the Florence 1st instance courts have not poisoned the well for that to work. I will have to see the minister's response before I can know for sure how that will turn out.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 5:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

To clarify:

One of the JPG images still shows the document location path, with “CDV” as a folder name. The other image does not.

In the “In Their Own Words” section, [ITOW:AK], in Post 49191 on 29 June 2010: [link]: “AMANDA KNOX'S STATEMENTS FROM NIGHT OF 5 NOV, 2007”:

Both translations ([1:45] and [5:45]) are Word documents, with the metadata showing “09 May 2008” and Last modified by “CDV”.

These two translations, by their nature, are not going to have anybody’s signatures on them.

PDFs of the original Italian-language statements, signed, are available in the same post. (metadata: created 16 March 2009, via Acrobat 5.0 Scan Plug-in for Windows) .Presumably the PDFs, from the sequential page numbering stamp, are from one of the court files (the defence’s?, or else the prosecution has a set of crayons, highlighters and various pens for over-marking the text).


Of translational interest:
“ho molto paura di Patrik, il ragazzo africano proprietario del pub denominato “Le Chic” di questa via Alessi ove io lavolro saltuariamente”

Became:
“I am really afraid of Patrick, the African boy who owns the pub called “Le Chic” located in Via Alessi where I work periodically”

The Italian says:
[ I’m really scared/afraid/frightened of Patrick, the African ragazzo owner of the pub called “Le Chic” in this Alessi Street where I worlk* part-time]

*{ndr: preserving the typing error in a similar fashion (assuming it is a typing mistake)}
ragazzo = ‘boy’, in the sense of ‘young man’, ‘lad’, ‘boy friend’, ‘guy’, etc; it would be unlikely that CDV would know the negative nuance of the word ‘boy’ in American English (or, if he did, then his use of it would be deliberate). Whether Amanda was speaking Italian or English, or her Italian translation of her English, or adopting local student lingo, etc, is not indicated.


I have a vague memory of some other PDFs, in English, with signatures. I’ll have a look.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 7:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

OT:

Found a thesis:

Esther Berkenbosch’s Master’s thesis on Intercultural Communication at the University of Utrecht, “Beauty or the Beast: A comparative study of the Italian and US mass media during the Amanda Knox trial” (September 2014)
[PDF]
Written in Italian



And there’s:
Alessandro Scherillo’s 2013 thesis in Applied Criminology on Piedmont Region’s site:
“il processo mass-mediatico quando la collettivita’ si identifica nella cronaca nera”
(“Trial by mass-media when society sees itself reflected in the case”)
([PDF])



-----
While looking, I've noticed a fair number of the search results are homework and essay-writing sites with the words "Amanda Knox" plus a topic marker like "Make literature review on", "Make my research paper on", "Thesis proposal on". Russian sites are particularly common, but there are others.

There must be a small cottage industry going on in this field. At least that explains where some of the money is going. (And also explains some of the sophomoric posts and claims floating around.)

It raises the question: should/could lawyers take advantage of such helpful sites?

In practice, the way the Missouri highway patrol (and others) DNA protocols got into Bongiorno's paperwork can't have been much different. (Actually, the results would have been more robust had she done so, I would expect, given the reviews that the big H has been getting from his students.)
Top Profile 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 9:17 am   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Ergon wrote:
Midwichcuckoo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Still depends on the Minister of Justice telling the court why the referral has no merit, hugo. Will they mount a proper defense or will they cave? I think the greatest danger might come from how they rule when she became a suspect and when she was given access to a lawyer. They have 90 days to respond.

Two invaluable resources for any one researching this would be Summary of Italian Judicial system
and
Rules of the European Court of Human Rights

Since I am not aware the January 14, 2016 Florence Court ruling against the cops being appealed that ruling would now be final. That, and the language of Marasca-Bruno, which went out of the way to confirm 'psychological pressures', might well turn out to be an Italian end goal.

Just saying.

I've been trying to learn more about this case and found your forum.

Does your last paragraph indicate that you think The European Court of Human Rights will rule for Amanda Knox? Also, regarding the question of her being a suspect, I though I'd read that she wasn't at the time she accused Patrick Lumumba, that she just made a voluntary confession and therefore wasn't entitled to a lawyer. So, I don't understand this question of psychological pressure, which I'm guessing applies to this issue.

Hi, Midwichcuckoo, and welcome to the forum.

I suggested that possibility, sure, though I've avoided saying what I think will actually happen ever since my involvement in the case. The question before the court is whether she received a fair trial on the charge of calunnia against Patrick Lumumba. What will decide it IMO is whether her 'confession' was coerced whether through slap on head or suggestion and whether she should have been advised of her right to a lawyer. Since she did have a translator with her the question of her ability to understand the charges might not be so important.

Per TMOMK Wiki Admissibility of the statements
Quote:
The Supreme Court would rule that the original statements would not be admissible. The Supreme Court concluded that Knox was a suspect before she made those statements and that she should have been treated as a suspect as soon as Raffaele stopped corroborating the alibi and admitted to lying at Amanda's request. Amanda never asked for a lawyer[*18] but under Italian law the police should have prompted her to get one. These statements would be admissible against Amanda Knox for her charges of falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba but not against Knox for the murder. The spontaneous statement made by Knox out of her own choosing would be admissible.[19]

[*18] Sky News
Quote:
An American held in connection with the murder of British student Meredith Kercher has claimed she did not realise Italian police were questioning her as a suspect.
Amanda Knox, 20, has also alleged she was told that having a lawyer present at the time would have "made things worse for her".

I would have liked to see her signature on the English transcripts.

I would have liked to see in writing she was advised of her right to a lawyer and she waived it.

It is up to the Italian Minister of Justice to provide an adequate defense though I wonder if they have the political will to do that, and whether the Hellmann, Marasca and the Florence 1st instance courts have not poisoned the well for that to work. I will have to see the minister's response before I can know for sure how that will turn out.


Hi an thanks for the welcome.

I did a bit of searching around to try and interpret this. A lot of the references for the right to a lawyer seem to relate to a right to silence.

The following is from a legal briefing, with references to a number of European Court of Human Rights cases. This is the conclusion:

"As set out above, the ECtHR has recently clarified that Articles 6(1) and 6(3) of the ECHR require that, as a rule, suspects in criminal proceedings have the right to access legal assistance at the latest when they are arrested, placed in custody, or their position is significantly affected by the circumstances. This right includes having legal assistance during any interrogations or questioning by the police, and can apply regardless of their formal legal status. Suspects have the right to communicate confidentially with their legal representatives, to have adequate time to prepare their defence, and to access the full range of services inherent in legal advice. Given the fundamental importance of the right to legal assistance, any waiver must not only be voluntary, but must also constitute a knowing and intelligent relinquishment of a right. "

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/ ... 120424.pdf

But i wondered if whatever rights Amanda Knox might have as a murder suspect were also rights she had connected to her false accusation. I thought that should be a separate issue and she shouldn't be protected from making it because if she was being questioned it was about her involvement in the murder. But then I found this reference from one of the court's lawyers:

"The right to silence cannot be confined to direct admission of wrongdoing, but any statement which may later be deployed in criminal proceedings in support of the prosecution case (Aleksandr Zaichenko v. Russia, §§52-60)."

And this next bit seems to suggest that there might be a problem with the idea of her waiving her right to a lawyer anyway.

"It is not clear whether the police always have to warn the suspect of his right to silence. It appears that a formal warning is required before the first questioning, where there are chances that the person being questioned can become a suspect and the questioning takes place in stressful or intimidating situation and without a lawyer. Given such proper safeguards, a subsequent waiver of the right to silence is immaterial (Aleksandr Zaichenko v. Russia, §§52-60)."

http://www.coe.int/t/dgi/hr-natimplemen ... ial_en.pdf

It's just a little strange that anyone could make a false accusation verbally and for it to be protected from consequences. But there seems to be an idea that stress can make people do strange things and if she had been advised by a lawyer to stay silent, she wouldn't have made the accusation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline olleosnep


Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 12:03 pm

Posts: 117

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 11:21 am   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Ergon wrote:
I would have liked to see her signature on the English transcripts.


It doesn't seem that English versions of her depositions were made by the police at the time. These are available only in Italian, it seems, and Knox signed those:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... x-0145.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... x-0545.pdf

There is also this document where police note the lawyers assigned the day of their arrest:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... awyers.pdf

The depositions were not a new procedure for Knox. She had signed three depositions previously:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline olleosnep


Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 12:03 pm

Posts: 117

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 11:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

It should be noted too that the Dec 2007 Knox interrogation with Mignini has a short form version that was also signed by Knox on each page.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... r-Knox.pdf
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 11:57 am   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

olleosnep wrote:

It doesn't seem that English versions of her depositions were made by the police at the time.


I can't find any, either, after searching for and through various PDFs for a couple of hours.

I do have a vague memory of something signed, in English if I recall, one pagers. Perhaps they were JPGs (if they exist and I'm not making it up).
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 12:20 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Midwichcuckoo wrote:
... "... to warn the suspect of his right to silence. ..."
...
It's just a little strange that anyone could make a false accusation verbally and for it to be protected from consequences. But there seems to be an idea that stress can make people do strange things and if she had been advised by a lawyer to stay silent, she wouldn't have made the accusation.



A suspect has the protective rights: silence, legal representation, food and water and rest breaks, etc.

Someone who is not a suspect wouldn't need a right to silence or legal representation.

If the police ask me, "But you did make a call. There's no point denying it. See. Look. Who was this call to?", and I go, "It's my boss! He's bad! He's the murderer!!" and then proceed to have a nervous breakdown, what would my lawyer have advised me five seconds before?

And I would have needed my lawyer in the first place anyway, because, ... I'm not a suspect.

Questioning stopped when the admission was made, exactly because suspect-status had been reached, and a lawyer would be required for any further questioning. (However, volunteering information isn't questioning.) In any case, none of any of that can be used against the suspect.


= = =
When Raffaele cracked, some of the police thought that maybe Amanda knew someone and might have been trying to cover for them (the guy on the phone was a potential candidate), and they were completely shocked by her breakdown and admission about Patrick. So was the interpreter. No-one was expecting that.


= = =
It could be argued that youth etc could be a factor in making an accusation against your boss in what could be described as a stressful situation (what exactly was stressful?), but the other young people involved in all the long hours of questioning across several days did not make similar accusations. (Plus also the others didn't know how to do stress-relief yoga.)

The defence position tried to cobble together various ways that stress and pressure may have arisen (for her alone), but Amanda's third version of why she said what she said was stronger than any of those attempts.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 12:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

For the curious,


Over here we call them “detained persons” and the interview is an “investigative procedure” (or a type of one, anyway). Also the person being called in to assist the detained person has to be a “legal practitioner” (which is ever-so slightly different to the general term “lawyer”).


Quote:
123 Right to communicate with friend, relative, guardian or independent person and Australian legal practitioner

(1) Before any investigative procedure in which a detained person is to participate starts, the custody manager for the person must inform the person orally and in writing that he or she may:
(a) communicate, or attempt to communicate, with a friend, relative, guardian or independent person:
(i) to inform that person of the detained person’s whereabouts, and

(ii) if the detained person wishes to do so, to ask the person communicated with to attend at the place where the person is being detained to enable the detained person to consult with the person communicated with, and

(b) communicate, or attempt to communicate, with an Australian legal practitioner of the person’s choice and ask that Australian legal practitioner to do either or both of the following:
(i) attend at the place where the person is being detained to enable the person to consult with the Australian legal practitioner,

(ii) be present during any such investigative procedure.

[LEPRA 2002], s 123




It must be pointed out, as was done in a judgment coincidentally handed down at about the same time that Raffaele was meeting Amanda at that music concert, that:

Quote:
"there is no principle of the common law that persons suspected by police officers of having committed a crime must be advised that they are entitled to communicate with a legal practitioner before being interrogated, or that in default evidence of any confession is automatically inadmissible. If there were such a principle, it would not have been necessary for those jurisdictions which have done so to have enacted legislation imposing a duty so to advise"

Carr v The State of Western Australia, High Court of Australia (23 Oct 2007), [2007] HCA 47 at [39] (Gummow, Heydon and Crennan JJ).
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 1:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

What that means is that TV and movies, the media and Wikipedia are starting to have an unconscious influence on how the upcoming cohorts of practitioners are shaping their thoughts.

That is to say, script writers are now unofficial legal academics and doctrine-setters.

They also have the same function when it comes to science, physics, faster-than-light travel etc.

And the special effects team makes people (like on Mythbusters) actually believe that firing an RPG at an SUV makes it flip over upside-down in a cloud of exploding gasoline.
Top Profile 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 2:09 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Catnip wrote:
Midwichcuckoo wrote:
... "... to warn the suspect of his right to silence. ..."
...
It's just a little strange that anyone could make a false accusation verbally and for it to be protected from consequences. But there seems to be an idea that stress can make people do strange things and if she had been advised by a lawyer to stay silent, she wouldn't have made the accusation.



A suspect has the protective rights: silence, legal representation, food and water and rest breaks, etc.

Someone who is not a suspect wouldn't need a right to silence or legal representation.

If the police ask me, "But you did make a call. There's no point denying it. See. Look. Who was this call to?", and I go, "It's my boss! He's bad! He's the murderer!!" and then proceed to have a nervous breakdown, what would my lawyer have advised me five seconds before?

And I would have needed my lawyer in the first place anyway, because, ... I'm not a suspect.

Questioning stopped when the admission was made, exactly because suspect-status had been reached, and a lawyer would be required for any further questioning. (However, volunteering information isn't questioning.) In any case, none of any of that can be used against the suspect.

It could be argued that youth etc could be a factor in making an accusation against your boss in what could be described as a stressful situation (what exactly was stressful?), but the other young people involved in all the long hours of questioning across several days did not make similar accusations. (Plus also the others didn't know how to do stress-relief yoga.)


But according to what Ergon posted, the Supreme Court said she was a suspect in the murder! (When was this? Before she made her accusation or before she signed the statement?) From the conversation example you gave, it seems as if you think she was a suspect in the murder before she made the false accusation. And the court seems to have said that her statements couldn't be used against her, according to one of Ergon's links. But they did use them to convict her of callunia! This is the bit I'm getting confused about, because as you say, if she is a suspect she has all these rights including a right to silence. And so, that would cover everything she said or wrote including the 'volunteering information' part too, wouldn't it? Or is there some way to see the verbal false accusation as being completely unprotected by the right to silence?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 2:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thanks for the links olleosnep. I take it Ronchetti and Tedeschi visited their clients in prison prior to the Matteini hearing?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 290

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 7:58 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Midwichcuckoo wrote:

This is the bit I'm getting confused about...


https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/concern_troll

Duh.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 8:20 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

hugo wrote:
Midwichcuckoo wrote:

This is the bit I'm getting confused about...


https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/concern_troll

Duh.


Why are you accusing me of being a troll for heaven's sake???!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 11:12 pm   Post subject: Define 'Suspect Entitled to Caution & Counsel'   

At what point, exactly, does someone in Italy become a suspect entitled to both a 'caution' AND (at state expense) the appointment of a lawyer of their choosing:

A) the first moment any cop, no matter how unreasonable/ incompetent/ corrupt/ racist/ sexist/ dumb/ mentally ill/ paranoid/ drunk/ etc., has the faintest inkling of a bare suspicion about Citizen X based on nothing more than a subjective/ personal/ idiosyncratic feeling or hunch;

OR

B) the first moment any cop has access to reliable information/ facts that would cause a REASONABLE person to suspect it LIKELY that Citizen X has committed a particular CRIME?

____________________________________________________

As the Nov. 5/6 interview began, what reliable information/ facts did the police have that would cause a REASONABLE person to suspect it LIKELY that Knox committed a CRIME???

(And what CRIME, exactly, was it supposed to be??? Murder?!)

_______________________________________________________

ETA: I'm behind on my replies to some of you (the sailing has been good lately!) and I'll try to get around to that today but there's a lot to catch up on - seems the application to the ECtHR may turn out to be very, very interesting! The more light that can be shed on the evening of Nov 5/6, the better, I say! (If Knox really was abused/ coerced, then, IMHO, it becomes much, much easier for an intelligent trier to find their way to a doubt that is reasonable. Are the Italian police going to stand up for themselves??? What, exactly, happened in their 'defamation suit'??? If her accusation wasn't voluntary, why did the Supreme Court, version 1.0 and version 2.0, convict her for calumny AND find that SHE WAS THERE during the murder/ that 'strong suspicions remain'?!)


Last edited by Jackie on Mon May 23, 2016 12:26 am, edited 5 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2016 11:35 pm   Post subject: CIVILITY   

Please, no calling anyone a troll on this forum. The questions were reasonable.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline olleosnep


Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 12:03 pm

Posts: 117

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 2:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Thanks for the links olleosnep. I take it Ronchetti and Tedeschi visited their clients in prison prior to the Matteini hearing?


K and S were arrested on November 6th. The Matteini hearings were on November 8th.

It seems like Ghirga was hired on November 7th (presumably to replace Ronchetti).

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... s-Edda.pdf

It seems like Tedeschi, the lawyer assigned to Sollecito, tried to meet him in prison on November 7th but wasn't able to, due to an 'apparent' veto from Mignini.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... prison.pdf

This issue came up at the CSM reprimand a few months ago.

In any case the lawyers were present at the Matteini hearings and the lawyers had ample opportunity to make their respective cases before the Riesame courts on November 30th.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 7:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The new member Midwichcuckoo seems to me a interesting member. His questions are also appropriate because those question can even be a part of the ECHR evaulation. I am anyway afraid that the ECHR maay decide pro Knox, just because being in general pro defendants and there could also be the press influence which seems to be very pro Knox /also in Germany and Swiss lately/. Oh by the way, only the name Midwichcuckoo is little difficult for me but am learning.....lol
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 2:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi, elisa. It's a sci-fi novel by John Wyndham, who also wrote The Day Of The Triffids. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Midwich_Cuckoos Twice filmed as The Village Of The Damned.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 3:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Hi, elisa. It's a sci-fi novel by John Wyndham, who also wrote The Day Of The Triffids. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Midwich_Cuckoos Twice filmed as The Village Of The Damned.


..yes and the movie starred George Sanders who also happened to narrate 'Shere Khan' in 'The jungle book'. Wonderful actor.

Anyway...better than calling myself 'Triffid'!

Thank you for your kindness and to elisa for nice comment too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jamie


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:42 pm

Posts: 133

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 3:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Midwichcuckoo, in answer to your question: in Italy there are two types of suspect. At the early investigation stage, everybody connected too the murder scene will be a potential suspect. Police may well suspect some more than others. This is the loose term by which we use the term, and as in tv and film drama.

In Italy, there is also 'formal suspect' status, which means a person stops being an informal suspect/witness as there is now cause to have evidence to believe this person may in fact have committed a crime, and legal rights kick in, such as being informed of your rights and the right to remain silent and also the right to have a lawyer present.

As of the evening AK entered the police station with her boyfriend, as far as the police were concerned, she was just someone closely connected to the crime scene, having been the only housemate at home with MK during the period of the murder.

As soon as she advised them she was at the scene and had taken 'Patrick' - her boss - there, the conversation was terminated.

It's a grey area, but the police had no way of knowing she was going to incriminate herself and Patrick Lumumba as of that point.

The defense made an application to bar the early 'confessions' and Massei accepted it. He could just as easily have allowed one of them, which wasn't technically legally barred, as I understand it. It was a case of a judge using his powers to uphold or reject a submission. It doesn't mean that because it was barred, it therefore meant AK was a formal suspect as of that point. It was not a legal finding, but purely procedural to ensure a fair trial.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 4:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

jamie wrote:
Midwichcuckoo, in answer to your question: in Italy there are two types of suspect. At the early investigation stage, everybody connected too the murder scene will be a potential suspect. Police may well suspect some more than others. This is the loose term by which we use the term, and as in tv and film drama.

In Italy, there is also 'formal suspect' status, which means a person stops being an informal suspect/witness as there is now cause to have evidence to believe this person may in fact have committed a crime, and legal rights kick in, such as being informed of your rights and the right to remain silent and also the right to have a lawyer present.

As of the evening AK entered the police station with her boyfriend, as far as the police were concerned, she was just someone closely connected to the crime scene, having been the only housemate at home with MK during the period of the murder.

As soon as she advised them she was at the scene and had taken 'Patrick' - her boss - there, the conversation was terminated.

It's a grey area, but the police had no way of knowing she was going to incriminate herself and Patrick Lumumba as of that point.

The defense made an application to bar the early 'confessions' and Massei accepted it. He could just as easily have allowed one of them, which wasn't technically legally barred, as I understand it. It was a case of a judge using his powers to uphold or reject a submission. It doesn't mean that because it was barred, it therefore meant AK was a formal suspect as of that point. It was not a legal finding, but purely procedural to ensure a fair trial.


Thanks. I understand this argument and that is/was my argument too until Ergon linked to this:

"The Supreme Court concluded that Knox was a suspect before she made those statements and that she should have been treated as a suspect as soon as Raffaele stopped corroborating the alibi.."

So, from that it would seem, the argument would be, she had a right to a lawyer who would have told her she also had a right to silence and should say nothing. If that had happened, then she wouldn't have falsely accused Lumumba and there wouldn't have been any statements.

But the court let the prosecution use the statements in the trial against Amanda Knox, according to the website at Ergon's link. That's what's confusing me because there must be something in Italian law I don't understand that lets them do that and proceed with a conviction. If so, there must be a way that Italy can uphold that at the ECtHR. But I don't get why they say she was a suspect, should have had a lawyer but even though they did say that, they still convict her. But you seem to be saying that some of the statements weren't legally barred but were barred anyway to 'ensure a fair trial'!

Do you understand why I'm confused? Have I not understood something that explains this?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 5:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

olleosnep wrote:
It seems like Tedeschi, the lawyer assigned to Sollecito, tried to meet him in prison on November 7th but wasn't able to, due to an 'apparent' veto from Mignini.


Huh?! Not what RS's diary said.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... english_1/

Quote:
All questioning had been stopped early on 6 November until Sollecito could have a lawyer present. He himself wrote to his father in his “prison diary” on November 7: “I may see you tomorrow, at least that is what I was told by Tiziano [Tiziano Tedeschi, his lawyer at the time], who I saw today and who defended me before the judge.”
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 5:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

jamie wrote:
Midwichcuckoo, in answer to your question: in Italy there are two types of suspect. At the early investigation stage, everybody connected too the murder scene will be a potential suspect. Police may well suspect some more than others. This is the loose term by which we use the term, and as in tv and film drama.

In Italy, there is also 'formal suspect' status, which means a person stops being an informal suspect/witness as there is now cause to have evidence to believe this person may in fact have committed a crime, and legal rights kick in, such as being informed of your rights and the right to remain silent and also the right to have a lawyer present.

As of the evening AK entered the police station with her boyfriend, as far as the police were concerned, she was just someone closely connected to the crime scene, having been the only housemate at home with MK during the period of the murder.

As soon as she advised them she was at the scene and had taken 'Patrick' - her boss - there, the conversation was terminated.

It's a grey area, but the police had no way of knowing she was going to incriminate herself and Patrick Lumumba as of that point.

The defense made an application to bar the early 'confessions' and Massei accepted it. He could just as easily have allowed one of them, which wasn't technically legally barred, as I understand it. It was a case of a judge using his powers to uphold or reject a submission. It doesn't mean that because it was barred, it therefore meant AK was a formal suspect as of that point. It was not a legal finding, but purely procedural to ensure a fair trial.


H Jamie and Midwichcuckoo

its important to understand that she was at the police station unasked and to some extent unwanted (Ficarra had told her to go home and get some sleep).

After a while, Ficarra asked her to help build a list of names of who had come by the house and might have encountered Meredith. Knox then set about that with gusto. It speeded up when Donino arrived.

That was ALL the questioning that went on that night. There was no interrogation as such. The list of names with maps and phone numbers exists.

After RS sold her out in another room and she was told this and went through several phases of shrill confusion and awkward silence, she fingered Patrick after police saw her response to Patrick - which she had just said she never sent - and hit herself on the head: Ficarra didnt hit Knox, Knox did.

Knox herself insisted on making BOTH statements (1:45 and 5:45) though they were not required. Mignini actually wanted to get away to see about bringing in Patrick.

Midwichcuckoo, if you interest in depth do read this 18-part series on TJMK for which we had all the quoted testimony translated and shared with the Wiki.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _overview/

You will see Knox's list of names right there.

The answer to your question as to why 2 different laws applied to Knox's statement was explained by the Supreme Court as shown in bold in Part 16 here.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... n_hoax_16/

Peter Quennell
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 5:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Midwichcuckoo wrote:
Do you understand why I'm confused? Have I not understood something that explains this?


As explained just above, you need to read the long passage in bold by the Supreme Court here.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... n_hoax_16/

Quote:
2. With reference to the second appeal ground by the defence, the Court observes that circumstantial statements are characterized by a different usability regime under a subjective aspect. In the case in which these originate from a person against whom there already is sustained circumstantial evidence as regards the same crime, that is to a crime connected with or tied to the one attributed to a third party, the same cannot be used not only against themselves, but neither in relation to co-accused in the same crime (or of those accused of connected or related crimes).

The regime of absolute unusability under Article 63 paragraph two Criminal Procedure Code is, instead, to be excluded in the case in which the declarant, whether called to respond, in the same or another matter, for a crime or for crimes attributed to others, which have no procedural ties with the one for which they are being proceeded against, with respect to which the person assumes the character of witness.

In fact, in the first case, due to the close connection and interdependence between the fact itself and the other one, there arises the necessity to also safeguard the declarant’s right to silence; in the second case, the declarant’s extraneity and indifference with respect to the facts in cause renders them immune to possible sanctions carried out by the investigative bodies (Cass., Sez. Un. 13 febbraio 1997, Carpanelli).

On a par with these principles, the statements made by AMK at 1:45 on 6 November 2007, – at the end of which the interview was suspended and the woman was placed at the disposition of the relevant judicial Authority, revealing circumstantial evidence against herself –, are usable only contra alios, while the “spontaneous statements” from 5:45 are not usable, neither against the suspect nor against other subjects accused of participation in the same crime, inasmuch as they were made without due process safeguards by a person who had formally assumed the status of suspect.

On the contrary, the account written in English by Ms K and translated into Italian is fully usable, under Article 237 Criminal Procedure Code, since it is a document originating from the suspect, who had been its spontaneous material author for a defence purpose. The disposition under examination allows attribution of probative relevance to the document not only as regards it and its representative contents, but also in the strength of its particular ties, which tie it to the suspect (or accused), thereby illuminating the review of admissibility which the judge had held to be in operation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 5:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
I thought Mignini HAS sued Sollecito /Gumbel for stating in Honor Bound he was offered a deal?


No. He hasnt though he still can. He filed a complaint for diffamazione and vilipendio as required by his terms of service with the Florence prosecution and he has been on the sidelines ever since.

Same with all other current cases, he does not have even one personal action for slander or libel going on (his colleague Giuttari did and does!)

This is a very common notion, that Mignini holds the reigns in these legal actions and his own lawyers do the work in the court.

All they do in fact is to put the charges in good shape (as with the amazing work on Maori's false accusations) and send it to the prosecution, and then step back.

At times Dr Mignini is not the first to hear what goes on in court, as neither he nor his lawyers are there.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 5:50 pm   Post subject: Re: PRESS RELEASE ABOUT DISPLAY OF MEREDITH'S BODY   

Various FOA are trying to deflect from the release of the picture of poor Meredith's body by saying well, the source was a video posted online. International Skeptics Forum
My issue was with Lyn Duncan posting the picture of Meredith. Its also fact the video is from the TV show which received it from the Sollecitos. Another thing I've alluded to is that Lyn appears to have access to photos not published on Bruce's site. The Vaseline jar, for example. Earlier reports from the FOA were that they'd mirrored the case files in various off shore servers to avoid legal action. Some of the downloadable files appear to have come from New Zealand servers. Lyn Drunken threatened for years to post Meredith's photos. She just did, for the first time. I would be very concerned what she might do next.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Rumpole


Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:46 pm

Posts: 241

Location: Old Bailey

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 6:05 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

olleosnep wrote:
Ergon wrote:
I would have liked to see her signature on the English transcripts.


It doesn't seem that English versions of her depositions were made by the police at the time. These are available only in Italian, it seems, and Knox signed those:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... x-0145.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... x-0545.pdf

There is also this document where police note the lawyers assigned the day of their arrest:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... awyers.pdf

The depositions were not a new procedure for Knox. She had signed three depositions previously:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

Ergon, sounds like American arrogance to me to expect any foreign police to take down interviews in English, except as far as I recall correctly you are not a U.S. citizen... :D

Olleosnep, as far as I understand, interpreters usually translate (orally) the written text before it's signed, so the person who's been questioned has a chance to correct any mistakes in the minutes before the final version is printed out and signed. Had a look at the Anna Donnino and Aida Colantone testimonies in the Wiki to see if this was taken up in the court, and yes it was by Comodi who asked Colantone about this but Donnino testimony doesn't seem to contain anything similar, here's the relevant excerpt:

DEPOSIZIONE DELLA - TESTE COLANTONE AIDA wrote:
PUBBLICO MINISTERO – DR.SSA COMODI
MC: Quando lei viene chiamata come interprete sta a fianco di chi viene sentito o sta a fianco del verbalizzante?
AC: Assolutamente, sempre a fianco di chi deve essere ascoltato.
MC: Alla fine lei ha detto che rilegge il verbale.
AC: Sì.
MC: Ovviamente all'interessato, a quello che è stato sentito.
AC: Sì.
MC: Lo rilegge traducendolo perché ovviamente il verbale è in italiano?
AC: Certo, certo.
MC: Amanda Knox ha fatto osservazione riguardo alla verbalizzazione degli atti che lei le ha tradotto?
AC: Assolutamente no.

MC: All'esito dei suoi vari esami diciamo.
AC: No, se mi è consentito di dirlo, sempre nei miei 22 anni di attività di interprete in Polizia, ho imparato ad interloquire a seconda della conoscenza dell’inglese della persona che mi sta di fronte, se è una persona di madrelingua inglese non ci sono problemi, se è una persona di un paese terzo che conosce un po’ l’inglese,valuto in che modo conosce l’inglese, se mi rendo conto che questa persona l’inglese lo conosce poco allora io pur di farmi capire, di essere certa che abbia capito quello che mi è stato detto di tradurre dalla Polizia io glielo dico mezzo italiano, mezzo inglese, quello che lui conosce, con i gesti, lo scriviamo su un foglio,quindi io sono matematicamente certa che Amanda abbia capito quello che le è stato detto anche perché è di madrelingua inglese.
MC: Non solo che ha capito, le avevo anche chiesto ha contestato il contenuto della verbalizzazione?
AC: No, no.
MC: Ha chiesto che venissero verbalizzate le domande e le risposte in lingua madre, in lingua inglese?
AC: No.
MC: Grazie.


Source:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/A ... _Testimony

Colantone says she reread the minutes translating them to AK who made no requests to change anything in them. Colantone was present at the interview that was held on 4 November 2007.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 7:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Rumpole, it is established principle in most western jurisdictions that witness and suspect statements should be given to them in a language they are familiar with. Having said that, I'm comfortable with the fact she had the services of a translator, and she signed the Italian transcript. I still hold the minutes should have reflected she was advised of her rights to a lawyer and declined them. In whatever language. Keeping in mind that is one of the complaints raised?

Midwichcuckoo, while the police may have felt there was evidence that Knox was involved in the murder, with some tub-thumping claims by police in the media they "always suspected her", the court allowed the 1:45 statement but not the 5:45 once RS refused to corroborate her alibi. She definitely was a suspect after that.

Knox will have to explain why she made the voluntary statements after 1:45 since she can't claim psychological or other pressures then. The court will decide if Mignini should have sat in and taken notes at that point, or should have had a lawyer present. But that relates only to the calunnia. He'd reasonable cause to arrest her for murder. It's a pity that she's using this to taint her conviction but the Bruno Marasca court has already done that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: ECtHR   

Rumpole wrote:
olleosnep wrote:
Ergon wrote:
I would have liked to see her signature on the English transcripts.


It doesn't seem that English versions of her depositions were made by the police at the time. These are available only in Italian, it seems, and Knox signed those:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... x-0145.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... x-0545.pdf

There is also this document where police note the lawyers assigned the day of their arrest:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... awyers.pdf

The depositions were not a new procedure for Knox. She had signed three depositions previously:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d ... e-Knox.pdf

Ergon, sounds like American arrogance to me to expect any foreign police to take down interviews in English, except as far as I recall correctly you are not a U.S. citizen... :D

Olleosnep, as far as I understand, interpreters usually translate (orally) the written text before it's signed, so the person who's been questioned has a chance to correct any mistakes in the minutes before the final version is printed out and signed. Had a look at the Anna Donnino and Aida Colantone testimonies in the Wiki to see if this was taken up in the court, and yes it was by Comodi who asked Colantone about this but Donnino testimony doesn't seem to contain anything similar, here's the relevant excerpt:

DEPOSIZIONE DELLA - TESTE COLANTONE AIDA wrote:
PUBBLICO MINISTERO – DR.SSA COMODI
MC: Quando lei viene chiamata come interprete sta a fianco di chi viene sentito o sta a fianco del verbalizzante?
AC: Assolutamente, sempre a fianco di chi deve essere ascoltato.
MC: Alla fine lei ha detto che rilegge il verbale.
AC: Sì.
MC: Ovviamente all'interessato, a quello che è stato sentito.
AC: Sì.
MC: Lo rilegge traducendolo perché ovviamente il verbale è in italiano?
AC: Certo, certo.
MC: Amanda Knox ha fatto osservazione riguardo alla verbalizzazione degli atti che lei le ha tradotto?
AC: Assolutamente no.

MC: All'esito dei suoi vari esami diciamo.
AC: No, se mi è consentito di dirlo, sempre nei miei 22 anni di attività di interprete in Polizia, ho imparato ad interloquire a seconda della conoscenza dell’inglese della persona che mi sta di fronte, se è una persona di madrelingua inglese non ci sono problemi, se è una persona di un paese terzo che conosce un po’ l’inglese,valuto in che modo conosce l’inglese, se mi rendo conto che questa persona l’inglese lo conosce poco allora io pur di farmi capire, di essere certa che abbia capito quello che mi è stato detto di tradurre dalla Polizia io glielo dico mezzo italiano, mezzo inglese, quello che lui conosce, con i gesti, lo scriviamo su un foglio,quindi io sono matematicamente certa che Amanda abbia capito quello che le è stato detto anche perché è di madrelingua inglese.
MC: Non solo che ha capito, le avevo anche chiesto ha contestato il contenuto della verbalizzazione?
AC: No, no.
MC: Ha chiesto che venissero verbalizzate le domande e le risposte in lingua madre, in lingua inglese?
AC: No.
MC: Grazie.


Source:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/A ... _Testimony

Colantone says she reread the minutes translating them to AK who made no requests to change anything in them. Colantone was present at the interview that was held on 4 November 2007.


Rumpole

Ergon is right. Those were not depositions or minutes Knox signed on 6-7 Nov, they were statements not required under any law which Knox herself insisted upon. She in effect dictated them so they were her initiative and words and Anna Donnino was the one who later put them in English. Knox herself wanted them to have standing (until she didnt) so she should have initialed them.

Rita Ficarra took her own notes of legal standing for the first "questioning" put in evidence in court, you can read them here.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _released/

The second meeting was merely for Dr Mignini to read Knox her rights, nothing else. Then she hijacked the meeting to beat his ear. There is a record of that by Dr Mignini here.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... challenge/
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 856

Location: New York

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Knox will have to explain why she made the voluntary statements after 1:45 since she can't claim psychological or other pressures then. The court will decide if Mignini should have sat in and taken notes at that point, or should have had a lawyer present. But that relates only to the calunnia. He'd reasonable cause to arrest her for murder. It's a pity that she's using this to taint her conviction but the Bruno Marasca court has already done that.


The ECHR "appeal" was filed way back, halfway through the Nencini appeal, and is like a train on rails now. I see no easy was for Dalla Vedova or Knox to pull back. Their interests now are not the same and one or other could explode. I dont think Mignini held Knox on grounds of murder on the night. In fact NOBODY in the questura was yet thinking Knox had a role in the murder itself, merely hiding the full story because Patrick had her freaked. She had police & prosecutor sympathy until they figured out she had framed Patrick and sheltered Guede for several weeks, which nobody thought was very nice.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Midwichcuckoo


Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:26 pm

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 10:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Midwichcuckoo, while the police may have felt there was evidence that Knox was involved in the murder, with some tub-thumping claims by police in the media they "always suspected her", the court allowed the 1:45 statement but not the 5:45 once RS refused to corroborate her alibi. She definitely was a suspect after that.


Ok, I think I'm starting to understand this. It looks like it's all about the difference between two crimes - first the murder and second, the false accusation. The ECtHR deals only with the false accusation and needs to be asked by Italy to treat the matters separately, I think.

The Supreme Court wouldn't allow the statement of 5:45 to be used against Amanda Knox for the murder, but it would allow her spontaneous note written afterwards against her for the murder (and the 1:45 against others but not her). It said she was a suspect in the murder case at the point Raffaelle Solecito took away her alibi, was therefore entitled to a lawyer and had a right to silence since that right looks like it goes along with the right to a lawyer. Also, because the police are confronting her with her lost alibi and challenging her about text messages, it seems pretty clear she was being interrogated or questioned before she admitted being at her house at the time of the murder and before she accused Lumumba of the killing.

For the false accusation, the Supreme Court says this is a different matter and Italian law can treat it differently. Amanda Knox is to be considered a witness not a suspect in this case. So, all the statements can be used against her. The court says:

"The regime of absolute unusability under Article 63 paragraph two Criminal Procedure Code is, instead, to be excluded in the case in which the declarant, whether called to respond, in the same or another matter, for a crime or for crimes attributed to others, which have no procedural ties with the one for which they are being proceeded against, with respect to which the person assumes the character of witness." (thanks to Fast Pete for this)

So, she gets all the rights and protections available in connection with the murder case, but has no protection at all for the false accusation case. Italy, therefore has to convince the ECtHR that this 'splitting' is the right thing to have done. I suppose that depends on the court's previous cases and whether they believe she was hit or had pressure put on her and whether that matters.

It's quite an interesting idea that the Italian Supreme Court has said (I think), what can be summarised as, 'Amanda Knox's questioning for the murder case was not handled correctly because she was entitled to a lawyer before she said she was at the crime scene and had a right to silence but, she was not being questioned as a suspect in the false accusation case and so she didn't have any rights connected to this, happened to commit that crime and was correctly convicted of it.'
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline olleosnep


Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 12:03 pm

Posts: 117

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 10:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Fast Pete wrote:
olleosnep wrote:
It seems like Tedeschi, the lawyer assigned to Sollecito, tried to meet him in prison on November 7th but wasn't able to, due to an 'apparent' veto from Mignini.


Huh?! Not what RS's diary said.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... english_1/

Quote:
All questioning had been stopped early on 6 November until Sollecito could have a lawyer present. He himself wrote to his father in his “prison diary” on November 7: “I may see you tomorrow, at least that is what I was told by Tiziano [Tiziano Tedeschi, his lawyer at the time], who I saw today and who defended me before the judge.”


It could be Tedeschi filed the paper and then got to see Sollecito later in the day. But, Sollecito's own phrase isn't clear (though the original Italian might be) There was no meeting with a judge on November 7th. That happened with Matteini on November 8th.
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 28 of 34 [ 8337 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 34  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


29,149,364 Views