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 Aug 21, 2017 1:54 pm
It is currently Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:54 pm
All times are UTC

RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 2 of 2 [ 304 posts ]
Author Message

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:34 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
Quote:
I hope everyone else finds at least one more correction to make.

Re “fantomatico ladro” how about *imaginary* thief.

Re “But the judges believe…” (last sentence in your p. 15). Original: “Ma ritiene il collegio…”. When beginning a new paragraph sentence, is it ok to translate “Ma” as “But”? It looks odd to me.

Re using months in words see last page it says: Decided in Rome on 12.16.2010.


1) I thought about "imaginary thief" but I excluded it for the same reasons I excluded "phantom thief".

That "ladro fantomatico" in that sentence means "unknown thief".
Actually, how about using "unknown thief"?

2) nice one. I inserted : "However, the Court believes that..."

3) I already changed it in the file I uploaded at 14:47 (CET).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:40 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
Quote:
I hope everyone else finds at least one more correction to make.

Re “fantomatico ladro” how about *imaginary* thief.

Re “But the judges believe…” (last sentence in your p. 15). Original: “Ma ritiene il collegio…”. When beginning a new paragraph sentence, is it ok to translate “Ma” as “But”? It looks odd to me.

Re using months in words see last page it says: Decided in Rome on 12.16.2010.


1) I thought about "imaginary thief" but I excluded it for the same reasons I excluded "phantom thief".

That "ladro fantomatico" in that sentence means "unknown thief".
Actually, how about using "unknown thief"?

2) nice one. I inserted : "However, the Court believes that..."

3) I already changed it in the file I uploaded at 14:47 (CET).


Maybe, but I thought the usage of fantomatico is to imply that it was imagined by someone.
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:46 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:54 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.

Ok is not important. I just understood that by using this word was to emphasized that those who staged the crime scene were creating an illusion of a thief, an illusion to give the impression of an 'imaginary' thief. is)
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:11 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.

Ok is not important. I just understood that by using this word was to emphasized that those who staged the crime scene were creating an illusion of a thief, an illusion to give the impression of an 'imaginary' thief.


Yes, to give the illusion of a thief but not of an "imaginary" thief.
They wanted to give the illusion of a "real" thief.

A "ladro fantomatico" is not a ghost or a figment of someone's imagination. It's a real person. But no one knows who he/she is.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:47 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.

Ok is not important. I just understood that by using this word was to emphasized that those who staged the crime scene were creating an illusion of a thief, an illusion to give the impression of an 'imaginary' thief.


Yes, to give the illusion of a thief but not of an "imaginary" thief.
They wanted to give the illusion of a "real" thief.

A "ladro fantomatico" is not a ghost or a figment of someone's imagination. It's a real person. But no one knows who he/she is.


Exactly and obviously I didn't explained properly, but that's why "unknown thief" I don't think it works. I can just imagined FOA saying: 'you see even the SC judges think that there was a thief! Is just that no one knows his name, but a thief there was!'

Never mind.
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 4:35 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.

Ok is not important. I just understood that by using this word was to emphasized that those who staged the crime scene were creating an illusion of a thief, an illusion to give the impression of an 'imaginary' thief.


Yes, to give the illusion of a thief but not of an "imaginary" thief.
They wanted to give the illusion of a "real" thief.

A "ladro fantomatico" is not a ghost or a figment of someone's imagination. It's a real person. But no one knows who he/she is.


Exactly and obviously I didn't explained properly, but that's why "unknown thief" I don't think it works. I can just imagined FOA saying: 'you see even the SC judges think that there was a thief! Is just that no one knows his name, but a thief there was!'

Never mind.


Well, that's not possible because that whole sentence starts out with a "tentativo" and a "simulare".
What is the judge saying in those lines?
He says that the court of appeal believes that Knox and Sollecito tried to simulate a theft and a murder committed by that same thief.
How could they have simulated a murder committed by an "imaginary" thief?
They were trying to simulate the murder committed by a real, albeit unknown, thief.

Also, if the judge wanted to write "imaginary thief", he would have written "ladro immaginario".

I think that whole paragraph is clear.
We'll just have to wait for Skep to read it and give us her opinion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 4:52 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Yummi wrote:
Clander wrote:

yeap,
the only gray word I wanted to leave in for now was the "lightning-fast fight". All the others are words that I highlighted were highlighted to remind me to change them and I forgot to remove the highlight once I edited the word. I really did not like that "Attorney General" for "Procuratore Generale" for example.


what about : "flash-fight" ?


I don't know. I was thinking of abandoning the idea of using any word related to "fulmine".
Maybe something like : "extremely brief fight".
Skep will decide which word to insert.


At the risk of belaboring the point...

Some of these words just don't convey the INTENSITY as well of the speed of the fight in question.
IMO, "Extremely brief fight" sounds like something two seven-year old kids might start in the back seat of the car, before Mom broke up the "fight."

You need something here that gives the idea of well, that it was both fast AND violent.
"Split-second" would good for something like a "split-second decision" or "split-second reflex" IMO, the term connotes something fast and impulsive. But split-second isn't quite right with this "fight." Perhaps I can't articulate/explain it...

We need a term that expresses speed and the drama/violence of the kind of fight that is described here.

Here are some Google examples, for usage, to make my point.

[i]1."This director, with films like “Wing Chun” or “Drunken Master” to his credit, is probably best known for his staging of lightning-fast fight sequences and ..."

"2.This patriotic Hong Kong martial arts thriller includes plenty of lightning-fast fight sequences and acrobatic action spectacles. ..."

and even an dog fight example:

3."There are dogs that will, lightning fast, "fight" instead of trying to flee, and the owner/handler will be bitten. ..."



If not lightning-fast...how 'bout "blisteringly fast"...? ;)
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:12 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Jools wrote:
Clander wrote:
The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.

Ok is not important. I just understood that by using this word was to emphasized that those who staged the crime scene were creating an illusion of a thief, an illusion to give the impression of an 'imaginary' thief.


Yes, to give the illusion of a thief but not of an "imaginary" thief.
They wanted to give the illusion of a "real" thief.

A "ladro fantomatico" is not a ghost or a figment of someone's imagination. It's a real person. But no one knows who he/she is.


And that's why I liked the dictionary example. The IT-ENG dictionary translation rul-) for "fantomatico" is, in fact, "ELUSIVE"-- "elusive thief.'
Remember:
The Free Dictionary definition of "elusive" u·sive (-lsv, -zv)
adj.
1. Tending to elude capture, perception, comprehension, or memory:
2. Difficult to define or describe:
--------------------------------------------------------------
For all those reasons, my vote is in favor of the dictionary-approved "elusive thief" dm-)
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:17 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Your "lightening-fast" is still my preferred suggestion (it's still in the latest DOC).
I don't like it because I don't like the "fulminea" used in the original text.
It's too generic.
I can use "fulminea" in sentences where "fulminea" means fractions of a seconds and then I can write other sentences where "fulminea" means decades.
So, of course the fight did not last decades, but what is meant by "fulminea" in that sentence.
It means "extremely quick" (and if that means 1 second, 1 minute, 10 minutes or more, I do not know).

Regarding the "elusive thief", that fantomatico, in that sentence, does not mean "elusive" (because when the police go after an "elusive thief", they know who that thief is. They are just having a hard time catching him).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:32 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

1) I Motivi di Ricorso...wouldn't translate as "Motives"for the appeal/second appeal ....

Change to The Grounds for the Second Appeal

2) "He had a sexual approach to Meredith"
Change to : He made a sexual advance towards Meredith

3) I don't like (in Section Seven) The wound was caused...."during the excitement of the actions of the attacker." because "excitement" connotes something positive.

My Change: I'd change "excitement of the actions of the attacker" to something like "the frenzy of the attacker's actions"

Please change everything "ecchymotic" in the document (all its various forms) to words like bruise and bruising.
"purplish marks of ecchymotic type" should be "purple, bruise-like marks"

Also, change "wrist of the left sleeve" to "cuff of the left sleeve."
th-)
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:41 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

B) According to the above, the appellant's defence contests the motivations given in the sentencing report of the appeal trial

Motivations isn't the right word. n-(( Again, I think the (legal word) is "grounds.'

Grounds meaning "The foundation for an argument, a belief, or an action; a basis." Often used in the plural "grounds"
.
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 5:53 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Thank you The 411.
The first suggestion (thanks to TomM) had been already made.
I inserted all the others.

EDIT:

The 411 wrote:
B) According to the above, the appellant's defence contests the motivations given in the sentencing report of the appeal trial

Motivations isn't the right word. n-(( Again, I think the (legal word) is "grounds.'

Grounds meaning "The foundation for an argument, a belief, or an action; a basis." Often used in the plural "grounds".


I did not insert the edit. Gray highlight for now.

TomM will go over the DOC anyway to check the words grounds/motives/motivations.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:19 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
The thief was not "imagined" because someone killed Meredith.
If the thief was "imaginary", then who killed her?
She could not have been killed by a phantom or an imaginary thief.

That is why I excluded phantom or imaginary.


I think the author means phantom or imaginary. The writer means precisely that this thief in fact didn't exist, it is just a literary charachter created by somebody's imagination: somebody actually killed Meredith who was not a thief. There are no traces at all of such a thief thus he is a "phantom".

I checked. From the Sabbatucci Coletti 2006,: fantomatico => 1. with features similar to a ghost. Synonim of: imaginary, unreal; 2. elusive, uncatchable, mistarious (imprendibile, inafferrabile, misterioso). - borrowed from French fantomatique (the adjective derived from fantòme).

fantomatico means imaginary, phantom, or elusive, mysterious
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 10:12 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Hi Clander. I just had a read-through of sections 8, 9 and 10. Here are some corrections.


line 4 of section 10: I think it should be "other young people" not "other young men" (as Sofia Crudo was supposed to be there).

line 14 of section 10: "with the reported limits", what does that mean?

line 10 of section 8: change "can't" to "cannot"
line 17 of section 8: change "realization" to "realisation"
line 5 of paragraph c) of section 8: put "presumably this is a mistake" as a footnote

5 lines from the start of page [21]: change "pointing" to "pointing out"
8 lines from the start of page [21]: change Crudo Sofia Concetta to Sofia Concetta Crudo

The footnote explaining the term "2nd appeal" should be on the page where section 7 starts.
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 10:13 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Yummi wrote:
Quote:
I think the author means phantom or imaginary. The writer means precisely that this thief in fact didn't exist, it is just a literary charachter created by somebody's imagination: somebody actually killed Meredith who was not a thief. There are no traces at all of such a thief thus he is a "phantom".


I completely agree with Yummi here. The term "fantomatico ladro" is ironic, meaning "there was no such thief". I'd still just go for "phantom thief".
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 11:48 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

I just got back from the movies. The movie was called "127 hours".
It felt as if the movie actually lasted 127 hours. :D
Snorefest.


Regarding the "fantomatico", here is the sentence without the unnecessary words:
"sarebbe stato posto in essere il tentativo volto a simulare un furto e l'omicidio da parte del fantomatico ladro."

How someone can try to simulate a murder committed by an "imaginary" thief is beyond me.

I like your "irony" explanation though. That might be the case.


Yummi, I know that "fantomatico" can be used as a synonym for "immaginario".
Try looking up "ladro fantomatico" (many dictionaries actually have that identical example).
You'll see that it's never used in the sense of "imaginary thief".
Have you ever read before someone write "ladro fantomatico" when they meant "ladro immaginario"?
(and don't answer: "In this report" :))



Anyway, I have inserted all the examples given and Skep can choose what she prefers.

I want to upload the latest file in a few minutes.
I did not see Tom today so I need to go over the grounds/motives one more time.

While I do this, can some please fix this sentence for me?:

j) Finally, it is an established fact that the Court made evaluations which are subject to criticism because they are objectively ambiguous. (middle of page 13)

You'll see how the beginning of the sentence is completely wrong. But I cannot think of anything for "circostanze di fatto" now.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:33 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

thoughtful wrote:
line 14 of section 10: "with the reported limits", what does that mean?


Thanks T.
I inserted all your edits.

I changed the "with the reported limits" to "within the aforementioned boundaries".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:38 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Skep,

here is the file.

Buon lavoro. :)


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

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:03 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
I just got back from the movies. The movie was called "127 hours".
It felt as if the movie actually lasted 127 hours. :D
Snorefest.


Regarding the "fantomatico", here is the sentence without the unnecessary words:
"sarebbe stato posto in essere il tentativo volto a simulare un furto e l'omicidio da parte del fantomatico ladro."

How someone can try to simulate a murder committed by an "imaginary" thief is beyond me.

I like your "irony" explanation though. That might be the case.


Yummi, I know that "fantomatico" can be used as a synonym for "immaginario".
Try looking up "ladro fantomatico" (many dictionaries actually have that identical example).
You'll see that it's never used in the sense of "imaginary thief".
Have you ever read before someone write "ladro fantomatico" when they meant "ladro immaginario"?
(and don't answer: "In this report" :))

(..)



But I mean, one of the two meanings is ok for me as far as it can be found in the dictionary. 1. meaning: phantom, imaginary; 2. elusive, uncatchable, misterious

I looked for "ladro fantomatico" in the Wikizionario (featuring real use):

fantomatico:

1. inconsistente, privo di una concreta tangibilità come un fantasma; immaginario
2. (per estensione) di chi, entrando in scena o colpendo quando e dove nessuno se l'aspetta, riesce sempre a sfuggire o a mantenere inalterato l'alone di mistero che lo circonda
* un ladro fantomatico
3. (per estensione) detto di chi o di ciò di cui si hanno notizie frammentarie o contraddittorie sia a riguardo della propria identità che a riguardo delle proprie attività
* Chiedo, poi, se il generale Siracusa possa darci qualche informazione sull'esistenza del fantomatico ufficio UCSI, che avrebbe o si arrogherebbe competenze in questa materia (da Verbali della Commissione Parlamentare Antimafia, seduta 9, Presidente: Tiziana Parenti [1])

*

Dizionario del Corriere della Sera:

1 (immaginario, irreale) phantom (attr.), imaginary, ghostly.
2 (inafferrabile) elusive, mysterious, uncatchable: un ladro fantomatico: an elusive thief.

*

I perceive some irony in the judge's use of "elusive thief" ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:11 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

thoughtful wrote:
(..)

The footnote explaining the term "2nd appeal" should be on the page where section 7 starts.


You are right. I put it in the section 8 thinking it was the first occurrence. I didn't see the title of section 7.
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 Mar 12, 2011 5:15 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Have just skimmed quickly through the latest version (30 min; Today's hearing is due to start in 40-50 min).

Very good effort, boys and girls! Substantial and solid work. Well done. pp-(


At the risk of "taking on the burden of challenging the original decisions" (gravamen, in the Italian sense) :) after being a phantom poster for such a long time, some minor and superficial items that stood out:


In the PDF, it looks like Iannelli struck out the bottom half of the cover sheet, and the beginning of page 1 restates the appearances of counsel in a clearer and less "template"-y way. The Word text should convey this; or perhaps remove the text.

Knok, etc –> change to “Knox”

PM –> use “prosecutor”, or “public prosecutor” ("the DPP", here in NSW)

[interrogatorio di garanzia] : “due process interview” or “due process hearing”

interrogation: use “interview” throughout. “Interrogation” conjures up images of water-boarding, third-degree and Guantanamo. Also, “interview" aligns with the PACE approach of modern police methods to interviewing witnesses and suspects.

First-degree trial: use “first-instance trial”, “trial at first instance”

the girl: “girl” doesn’t quite capture “ragazza” all the time in all its nuances, and there are different age ranges and attitudes in both words; suggest “her” or “Meredith”, or even “ragazza” (e.g., like Signora is used in English), if it doesn’t become too stylistically monotonous, that is.

and then murder by a phantom burglar: definitely ironic; in smiley terms, there would have been a burglar ;) somewhere in the cottage


Code of Penal Procedure: use “Criminal Procedure Code”

Penal Code: use “Criminal Code”

prof. : use “Prof.”

Date format: American-style month-day-year definitely looks quaint, but it remains understandable (most of the time); am too used to the "4th of July" format, I suppose.


Almost tempted to suggest "blitzkrieg fight" for the sudden and fatal incursion.

But these are all minor points.


Overall, a very good effort.

Once again, well done!
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:08 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Judges wrote:
Quote:
sarebbe stato posto in essere il tentativo volto a simulare un furto e l'omicidio da parte del fantomatico ladro."


Clander wrote:
Quote:
How someone can try to simulate a murder committed by an "imaginary" thief is beyond me.


It's funny how you don't pick up on the irony and the meaning that seems really clear to me from this sentence. It seems completely comprehensible to me, not only on the part of the judges, but on the part of the people staging the break-in.

"Hey, let's make it look as though a thief broke in here. Then everyone will believe that he's the one who committed the murder - even though in fact he doesn't really even exist!"

Isn't that simulating that a break-in and murder were committed by a phantom/imaginary thief who doesn't exist?
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:21 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

thoughtful wrote:
Judges wrote:
Quote:
sarebbe stato posto in essere il tentativo volto a simulare un furto e l'omicidio da parte del fantomatico ladro."


Clander wrote:
Quote:
How someone can try to simulate a murder committed by an "imaginary" thief is beyond me.


It's funny how you don't pick up on the irony and the meaning that seems really clear to me from this sentence. It seems completely comprehensible to me, not only on the part of the judges, but on the part of the people staging the break-in.

"Hey, let's make it look as though a thief broke in here. Then everyone will believe that he's the one who committed the murder - even though in fact he doesn't really even exist!"

Isn't that simulating that a break-in and murder were committed by a phantom/imaginary thief who doesn't exist?


I think the judge is ironic and thinks the thief is imaginary. But in rendering the logical value expressed by the wording of the phrase, here the ironical effect is probably given by "elusive", "uncatchable". The judge means that the thief must be really so uncatchable, so misterious, thus the irony: the sottinteso is that such an uncatchable and elusive thief is also imaginary. However this is "sottintesto", unexpressed.
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:41 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

thoughtful wrote:
Judges wrote:
Quote:
sarebbe stato posto in essere il tentativo volto a simulare un furto e l'omicidio da parte del fantomatico ladro."


Clander wrote:
Quote:
How someone can try to simulate a murder committed by an "imaginary" thief is beyond me.


It's funny how you don't pick up on the irony and the meaning that seems really clear to me from this sentence. It seems completely comprehensible to me, not only on the part of the judges, but on the part of the people staging the break-in.

"Hey, let's make it look as though a thief broke in here. Then everyone will believe that he's the one who committed the murder - even though in fact he doesn't really even exist!"

Isn't that simulating that a break-in and murder were committed by a phantom/imaginary thief who doesn't exist?


The first time I read your "phantom thief" I thought: "how does a phantom kill someone?" (that is what the sentence implies).
I did not pick up any irony at all so, of course, I tried to find another meaning for that word.
And sure, now that you mentioned that the judge was being ironic, I can see it now.
That is the only way I can see how a "phantom" can kill someone.

I don't know about you guys but I missed Massei's writing during this report.
The guy writes like my grandfather but he's an extremely careful writer.
This guy was way too sloppy.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:44 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Yummi wrote:
I think the judge is ironic and thinks the thief is imaginary. But in rendering the logical value expressed by the wording of the phrase, here the ironical effect is probably given by "elusive", "uncatchable". The judge means that the thief must be really so uncatchable, so misterious, thus the irony: the sottinteso is that such an uncatchable and elusive thief is also imaginary. However this is "sottintesto", unexpressed.


Damn, I was just about to write that. :)
I wanted to say that I did not insert The 411's "elusive" in the DOC file among the suggested words.
But that "elusive" might just be the most ironic of them all.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Skep,

here is the file.

Buon lavoro. :)



Merci!
A+
Skep

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:58 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Quote:
I don't know about you guys but I missed Massei's writing during this report.
The guy writes like my grandfather but he's an extremely careful writer.
This guy was way too sloppy.


Oh, definitely. No comparison. But I think part of the reason is that this judge was probably just quietly swearing to himself as he wasted his time writing this report on a case that never really deserved to come in front of him anyway. Rudy's defence was really reaching sometimes - especially when they said that the judge isn't supposed to use the fact that he lied as an indication of guilt because "the accused has the right to lie" !
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:02 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

thoughtful wrote:
Oh, definitely. No comparison. But I think part of the reason is that this judge was probably just quietly swearing to himself as he wasted his time writing this report on a case that never really deserved to come in front of him anyway. Rudy's defence was really reaching sometimes - especially when they said that the judge isn't supposed to use the fact that he lied as an indication of guilt because "the accused has the right to lie" !


It's obvious that he didn't give a shit (he would have at least checked the spelling of the names if he had).

I was thinking about sentences like the "mani nitide e tondeggianti" and that a judge should leave irony (if it's not just another poorly constructed sentence) out of sentencing reports. When we spotted Massei's *possible* ironic sentence, that sentence worked both ways. With an ironic meaning or not.

Here is another sentence I do not like how it was written (it's the one I spotted before I sent the file to Skep):

"In definitiva da circostanze di fatto sicure la Corte ha tratto valutazioni criticabili perché oggettivamente equivoche."

This is how you can read that sentence:
1) the Supreme Court judge is criticizing the lower Court. He says that the "valutazioni" are rightly "criticabili" because the "valutazioni" are "oggettivamente equivoche".
2) the Supreme Court judge is defending the lower Court. He says that the "valutazioni" are "criticabili" BUT, poor lower court judges, it's not their fault because the "circostanze di fatto" were "equivoche".

Massei would have inserted the missing verb to avoid any ambiguity.
1) perché sono oggettivamente equivoche
2) perché erano oggettivamente equivoche

I am going with the second interpretation.

I suggest:

"In conclusion, from sound factual circumstances, the Court reached judgments which are subject to criticism because [they are] objectively ambiguous."
(this sentence is ambiguous as the original)

If Skep prefers to insert what I think the judge means, then:
"In conclusion, from sound factual circumstances, the Court reached judgments which are subject to criticism because [the factual circumstances were] objectively ambiguous."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:02 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Here is the proofed version. Thanks for the hard work, excellent work, etc.

Please have one last look. In particular, the yellow indicates where I have made minor changes (to correct typos, improve wording, etc.).

The green, however, indicates the names of certain people, in particular people who could possibly be called as witnesses in the appeal that is underway. I am thinking their names should be omitted because of this item on the first page:

Quote:
For the dissemination of this ruling please omit the names and other identification data as by art. 52 law 196/2003 because:
 disposed by the office
 at the party’s request
 imposed by law


The third box, imposed by law, is ticked.

As a precaution, should we leave out all but the known names? Alex Crudo is a known name, Allesandra Formica is a known name... but Mohalmmed Egbaria, Phillip Maly and Sophia Crudo.....

Guidance please!


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:05 pm   Post subject: "Rudy" Spelling   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Here is the proofed version. Thanks for the hard work, excellent work, etc.

Please have one last look. In particular, the yellow indicates where I have made minor changes (to correct typos, improve wording, etc.).

The green, however, indicates the names of certain people, in particular people who could possibly be called as witnesses in the appeal that is underway. I am thinking their names should be omitted because of this item on the first page:

Quote:
For the dissemination of this ruling please omit the names and other identification data as by art. 52 law 196/2003 because:
 disposed by the office
 at the party’s request
 imposed by law


The third box, imposed by law, is ticked.

As a precaution, should we leave out all but the known names? Alex Crudo is a known name, Allesandra Formica is a known name... but Mohalmmed Egbaria, Phillip Maly and Sophia Crudo.....

Guidance please!


I don't have the answer for this...but can we change Rudi to RUDY throughout the entire document? (Just noticed "Rudi" on the first page...)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:23 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

On the subject of 'phantoms', phantom is just fine. The word can indicate something or someone that is elusive OR does not exist. For example, we use the official term 'phantom limb' to describe instances where someone has had a limb removed yet still feels it. Indications are given that the limb exists, but it does not.


As for names, unless they gave testimony on the stand (in which case their names are already publicly named) we blank out their names and add a footnote to explain that we have done so and why.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: "Rudy" Spelling   

The 411 wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Here is the proofed version. Thanks for the hard work, excellent work, etc.

Please have one last look. In particular, the yellow indicates where I have made minor changes (to correct typos, improve wording, etc.).

The green, however, indicates the names of certain people, in particular people who could possibly be called as witnesses in the appeal that is underway. I am thinking their names should be omitted because of this item on the first page:

Quote:
For the dissemination of this ruling please omit the names and other identification data as by art. 52 law 196/2003 because:
 disposed by the office
 at the party’s request
 imposed by law


The third box, imposed by law, is ticked.

As a precaution, should we leave out all but the known names? Alex Crudo is a known name, Allesandra Formica is a known name... but Mohalmmed Egbaria, Phillip Maly and Sophia Crudo.....

Guidance please!


I don't have the answer for this...but can we change Rudi to RUDY throughout the entire document? (Just noticed "Rudi" on the first page...)



The problem is that his name is spelled both RUDY and RUDI in the Italian original.
Do we keep this (as with Xnox etc.) or hamronize? If we harmonize, why for Rudi but not Xnoxy?
On the front page, the Italian has Rudi, on page 7 it is Rudi. Etc.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:53 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Skep:
Just offering a few minor suggestions...

In the intro:

and the accused 's lawyer, Walter Biscotti:
1. Change word order and make it "the lawyer for the accused"

Then..

2. "doorhandle" should be two separate words...

3. Re: the socks...are they going to be "tennis socks" throughout?

4. Also, change sponge towels to "terry" or whatever was agreed upon.

Also on the floor, visible after rotation of the body, was a tennis sock stained with blood, two sponge towels, one green and the other ivory coloured, the latter completely soaked in blood.

5. d) In the other areas of the upper flat the following was found. I would add a COLON at the end of that phrase and change that to:

The following was found in the other areas of the upper flat:

Skep...how do you feel about adding the direct article "THE" in front of "Sentence" 9on the "title page" ) and make it "THE Sentence of......"
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 5:09 pm   Post subject: Re: "Rudy" Spelling   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
The 411 wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Here is the proofed version. Thanks for the hard work, excellent work, etc.

Please have one last look. In particular, the yellow indicates where I have made minor changes (to correct typos, improve wording, etc.).

The green, however, indicates the names of certain people, in particular people who could possibly be called as witnesses in the appeal that is underway. I am thinking their names should be omitted because of this item on the first page:

Quote:
For the dissemination of this ruling please omit the names and other identification data as by art. 52 law 196/2003 because:
 disposed by the office
 at the party’s request
 imposed by law


The third box, imposed by law, is ticked.

As a precaution, should we leave out all but the known names? Alex Crudo is a known name, Allesandra Formica is a known name... but Mohalmmed Egbaria, Phillip Maly and Sophia Crudo.....

Guidance please!


I don't have the answer for this...but can we change Rudi to RUDY throughout the entire document? (Just noticed "Rudi" on the first page...)



The problem is that his name is spelled both RUDY and RUDI in the Italian original.
Do we keep this (as with Xnox etc.) or hamronize? If we harmonize, why for Rudi but not Xnoxy?
On the front page, the Italian has Rudi, on page 7 it is Rudi. Etc.


Hey Ms. Fudgy Palm!!! :lol:

I think a number of us (look up thread--Jools, Clander, me, ...)felt strongly in maintaining a consistent but CORRECT spelling of EVERYONE'S NAME throughout the document. No matter what mistakes, I mean mysteaks... were made in spelling.

Humor aside, the misspellings really only distract from the content. It's pointless to keep them as is. Let's keep all names consistently spelled CORRECTLY.

On a lighter note:
Skep, you, who practically never, ever make a mistake or a typo (unlike yours truly and many others)...typed "hamronize" above. I love it! It's crying out for its own definition. What do you call pork product served on a frozen water surface?
Hamronize. pig-) is) and/or it's time for lunch...
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:27 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Skep, the following footnote:

[p.17 ]
"Translator’s note: presumably this is a mistake" ,
I can tell you I feel rather sure that "shortly before or shortly after Nov. 1, 2007" is not a mistake. The writer really means to write 1-2 days or so before or after Nov 1.
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:30 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

The document doesn't have an incorrect pagination. Believe me Skep, page 20 is actually missing.
If you want you can check my for comment on the point, page1 of this thread.
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:33 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

footnote 1

(1) Translator’s note: the original term is “ricorso”: this is the term used in criminal procedure to indicate an appeal of legitimacy, in fact an appeal of last instance. We translated the term in English as "2nd appeal".

is in the title of section 8.

It should be moved to the title of section 7.
like this:

- 7 – The grounds for the 2nd appeal (1)
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:41 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

maybe it is the case to insert the note on "incidente probatorio" at p. [9] , line 9 § A,
referred to the words "pre-trial discovery stage",

like this:

"The appeal judges called on the opinions of the prosecution's expert witnesses - consultants Bacci, Linneri, Marchionni, and during the pre-trial discovery stage (*) Dr. Aprile and Dr. Umani Rochi, who spoke of an escalation of violence against the victim. "

footnote:

(*) incidente probatorio – this is a legal option provided by the code of criminal procedures (articles 392-404) for the collection of evidence during the pre-trial phases in a formal event ruled by the investigation judge. Both witness reports and pieces of physical evidence can be collected under this formula, and may enter a subsequent trial as evidence without being discussed again. When this option is chosen a formal context is opened to which all parties are called to participate. The formula is often used to collect opinions of experts, it can involve multiple witnesses/experts and a discussion between them may occur. The main feature of the incidente probatorio is a ritualized style where findings and actions are shown to all other parties. The collection of the bra clasp in Dec. 2007 was an event taking place in this legal formula.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:17 pm   Post subject: Re: "Rudy" Spelling   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
The 411 wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Here is the proofed version. Thanks for the hard work, excellent work, etc.

Please have one last look. In particular, the yellow indicates where I have made minor changes (to correct typos, improve wording, etc.).

The green, however, indicates the names of certain people, in particular people who could possibly be called as witnesses in the appeal that is underway. I am thinking their names should be omitted because of this item on the first page:

Quote:
For the dissemination of this ruling please omit the names and other identification data as by art. 52 law 196/2003 because:
 disposed by the office
 at the party’s request
 imposed by law


The third box, imposed by law, is ticked.

As a precaution, should we leave out all but the known names? Alex Crudo is a known name, Allesandra Formica is a known name... but Mohalmmed Egbaria, Phillip Maly and Sophia Crudo.....

Guidance please!


I don't have the answer for this...but can we change Rudi to RUDY throughout the entire document? (Just noticed "Rudi" on the first page...)



The problem is that his name is spelled both RUDY and RUDI in the Italian original.
Do we keep this (as with Xnox etc.) or hamronize? If we harmonize, why for Rudi but not Xnoxy?
On the front page, the Italian has Rudi, on page 7 it is Rudi. Etc.



We go with 'Rudy' across the board, since that's what Rudy calls himself and how he spells it. Also, change Xnox and all other variations to Knox. Translating a document in good faith doesn't mean one has to retain all the typos. We can however insert a note about this

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:26 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Michael wrote:
On the subject of 'phantoms', phantom is just fine. The word can indicate something or someone that is elusive OR does not exist. For example, we use the official term 'phantom limb' to describe instances where someone has had a limb removed yet still feels it. Indications are given that the limb exists, but it does not.


As for names, unless they gave testimony on the stand (in which case their names are already publicly named) we blank out their names and add a footnote to explain that we have done so and why.


The other day I was curious to see if Massei used the words "fantomatico ladro".
He does.
But, contrary to the Supreme Court judge, what does Massei do just before he uses those words for the very first time?
He adds the words "a questo punto può essere così qualificato" (at this point we can call him a...).
So he is letting us know what he means by that "phantom thief" throughout the report.

Personally I still prefer "unknown thief".
It would allow me to not give an ironic meaning to that sentence (because "phantom/imaginary" thieves do not kill people).
Furthermore, Massei himself refers to the thief as an "unknown thief/criminal" quite a few times.
Search the Massei report for the word "unknown" (or "ignoto" in Italian).

I think you all know by now that I really I would not like to use the word "phantom/imaginary" in that sentence. :)
(because of how it is written in Italian)

Regarding the blacking out of names***/inserting latest edits, who is going to make these changes?
I can make the edits if you wish.
When I'm done with the edits, I can send the file to Skep for one final look and then I can create the PDF file.
Just let me know.

*** The names need to be removed from the original PDF as well.

P.S.
I say we go with "Rudy" all the time and page 20 is MISSING.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:55 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

phantom is fine Claudio, since it can also mean elusive. The judge is referring to something 'intangible' and the word phantom captures that perfectly.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:22 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Here are some more suggestions
Page 6
--Instead of suspicion of Amanda...suspicion about Amanda
--Is there any way to break up the one sentence that is FIFTEEN LINES LONG!?!

Page 7

--Instead of "there's an arch.." As an architecture term I think this should be "there's an archway"
Page 9
--Instead of "an agonised scream" or "heart-rending" scream, a more appropriate word for straziante here is:
harrowing.
"a harrowing scream."


Page 10
--"Forzare" is the verb, which, in addition to meaning "forcing" also means "twisting" as in "twisting the meaning of a word" (forzare il significato di una parola). That's why I selected twisting instead of "forcing the evidence."

This is what we have:

It would be forcing the evidence from the trial to[discount this by asserting]that none of the people that the victim frequented ever heard anything from her about this, given that the same judges admit that the girl was reserved and that the acquaintance was a short one.

I think this reads more clearly:

It would be twisting the trial evidence to state that the victim had never confided about this matter to any of the people she frequented. The same judges recognize that the girl was by nature, reserved. The judges also realize that the two of them had only been acquainted a short while.

*(or discreet?)

BTW, THIS IS THE ORIGINAL ITALIAN.
Si forzerebbero i dati del processo quando si dice che nessuno delle persone frequentate dalla vittima ha avuto mai la confidenza della conoscenza, posto che gli stessi giudici riconoscono che la ragazza era riservata e che la conoscenza risaliva da poco tempo.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:26 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Michael wrote:
On the subject of 'phantoms', phantom is just fine. The word can indicate something or someone that is elusive OR does not exist. For example, we use the official term 'phantom limb' to describe instances where someone has had a limb removed yet still feels it. Indications are given that the limb exists, but it does not.


As for names, unless they gave testimony on the stand (in which case their names are already publicly named) we blank out their names and add a footnote to explain that we have done so and why.


The other day I was curious to see if Massei used the words "fantomatico ladro".
He does.
But, contrary to the Supreme Court judge, what does Massei do just before he uses those words for the very first time?
He adds the words "a questo punto può essere così qualificato" (at this point we can call him a...).
So he is letting us know what he means by that "phantom thief" throughout the report.

Personally I still prefer "unknown thief".
It would allow me to not give an ironic meaning to that sentence (because "phantom/imaginary" thieves do not kill people).
Furthermore, Massei himself refers to the thief as an "unknown thief/criminal" quite a few times.
Search the Massei report for the word "unknown" (or "ignoto" in Italian).

I think you all know by now that I really I would not like to use the word "phantom/imaginary" in that sentence. :)
(because of how it is written in Italian)

Regarding the blacking out of names***/inserting latest edits, who is going to make these changes?
I can make the edits if you wish.
When I'm done with the edits, I can send the file to Skep for one final look and then I can create the PDF file.
Just let me know.

*** The names need to be removed from the original PDF as well.

P.S.
I say we go with "Rudy" all the time and page 20 is MISSING.


Clander, I checked with a journalist. Page 20 is not missing. The document is mis-paginated.

For phantom, use whatever you want. I think it sounds fine. Also, in my edit, because the original is not well-written, I did not try and transform the document. I just tried to correct the obvious grammatical errors and typos.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:52 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

CLANDER wrote:
"I think you all know by now that I really I would not like to use the word "phantom/imaginary" in that sentence. :)
(because of how it is written in Italian)"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the record, I don't like "phantom" or "imaginary", either, Clander.

But "unknown" doesn't quite cut it, either, I'm afraid. Since "unknown" only affirms that the thief exists but he has not yet been ID'd.

That's why I still vote for 'elusive", which is, let the record reveal, the dictionary-approved definition.
Here's an Italian language definition of "fantomatico" including "LADRO FANTOMATICO" as the example.

rul-) "FANTOMATICO:
2. (per estensione) di chi, entrando in scena o colpendo quando e dove nessuno se l'aspetta, riesce sempre a sfuggire o a mantenere inalterato l'alone di mistero che lo circonda

* un ladro fantomatico


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

Also, there's this IT-ENG translation...

FANTOMATICO
"2 (inafferrabile) elusive, mysterious, uncatchable: un ladro fantomatico an elusive thief."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone tell me...what's the big problem in using the word "elusive?" sh-))
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:21 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

The 411 wrote:
CLANDER wrote:
"I think you all know by now that I really I would not like to use the word "phantom/imaginary" in that sentence. :)
(because of how it is written in Italian)"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the record, I don't like "phantom" or "imaginary", either, Clander.

But "unknown" doesn't quite cut it, either, I'm afraid. Since "unknown" only affirms that the thief exists but he has not yet been ID'd.

That's why I still vote for 'elusive", which is, let the record reveal, the dictionary-approved definition.
Here's an Italian language definition of "fantomatico" including "LADRO FANTOMATICO" as the example.

rul-) "FANTOMATICO:
2. (per estensione) di chi, entrando in scena o colpendo quando e dove nessuno se l'aspetta, riesce sempre a sfuggire o a mantenere inalterato l'alone di mistero che lo circonda

* un ladro fantomatico


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

Also, there's this IT-ENG translation...

FANTOMATICO
"2 (inafferrabile) elusive, mysterious, uncatchable: un ladro fantomatico an elusive thief."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone tell me...what's the big problem in using the word "elusive?" sh-))


I see no problem. Remember, we are striving to give a good idea of what the report says, nothing less and nothing more.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:21 am   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Clander, I checked with a journalist. Page 20 is not missing. The document is mis-paginated.


wtf)

If page 20 is not missing, then that sentence takes the cake for the most poorly written sentence in the report.

This sentence is a guessing game:

Ed anche se si deve rilevare, come hanno correttamente ritenuto i giudici di merito, che successivamente all'azione omicidiaria e sopravvenuta una attività tesa a simulare un tentativo di furto, che i giudici di merito e la difesa dello stesso ricorrente convengono essere avvenuta ad opera di altri e non dell'imputato, non si vede la ragione perché la simulazione dovesse comprendere la svestizione del corpo ormai senza vita della vittima e l'accanimento sul suo corpo per contusioni e ferite che deponevano chiaramente per una protratta azione lesiva antecedente alla coltellata mortale e che - deve ribadirsi - non collegato alle altre circostanze ed ai collegamenti inferenziali operati dai giudici.

The first time I read that sentence I thought that the "collegato" was just a typo (instead of "collegati").
But the sentence still made no sense.
All theories welcome.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:47 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Clander, I checked with a journalist. Page 20 is not missing. The document is mis-paginated.


wtf)

If page 20 is not missing, then that sentence takes the cake for the most poorly written sentence in the report.

This sentence is a guessing game:

Ed anche se si deve rilevare, come hanno correttamente ritenuto i giudici di merito, che successivamente all'azione omicidiaria e sopravvenuta una attività tesa a simulare un tentativo di furto, che i giudici di merito e la difesa dello stesso ricorrente convengono essere avvenuta ad opera di altri e non dell'imputato, non si vede la ragione perché la simulazione dovesse comprendere la svestizione del corpo ormai senza vita della vittima e l'accanimento sul suo corpo per contusioni e ferite che deponevano chiaramente per una protratta azione lesiva antecedente alla coltellata mortale e che - deve ribadirsi - non collegato alle altre circostanze ed ai collegamenti inferenziali operati dai giudici.

The first time I read that sentence I thought that the "collegato" was just a typo (instead of "collegati").
But the sentence still made no sense.
All theories welcome.

FWIW let's see if I can explain my self properly this time... pp-(
I just wrote that whole paragraph in Spanish to understand it better (it turns out is nearly same words and exact construction) and to me it makes sense the use of "collegamento" ['unrelated' in the singular masculine] because he is making a reference to the “accanimento”.

Quote:
Can anyone tell me...what's the big problem in using the word "elusive?"


IMO ‘elusive’ is wrong because it does not tell me that the thief was unreal, is telling me the thief was: subtle, evasive, hard to catch…

Maybe you meant *illusive* (consisting of an illusion) or *allusive* (making an illusion)???

I think the best one so far is phantom thief.
:)
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:06 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Clander wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Clander, I checked with a journalist. Page 20 is not missing. The document is mis-paginated.


wtf)

If page 20 is not missing, then that sentence takes the cake for the most poorly written sentence in the report.

This sentence is a guessing game:

Ed anche se si deve rilevare, come hanno correttamente ritenuto i giudici di merito, che successivamente all'azione omicidiaria e sopravvenuta una attività tesa a simulare un tentativo di furto, che i giudici di merito e la difesa dello stesso ricorrente convengono essere avvenuta ad opera di altri e non dell'imputato, non si vede la ragione perché la simulazione dovesse comprendere la svestizione del corpo ormai senza vita della vittima e l'accanimento sul suo corpo per contusioni e ferite che deponevano chiaramente per una protratta azione lesiva antecedente alla coltellata mortale e che - deve ribadirsi - non collegato alle altre circostanze ed ai collegamenti inferenziali operati dai giudici.

The first time I read that sentence I thought that the "collegato" was just a typo (instead of "collegati").
But the sentence still made no sense.
All theories welcome.


Skep, page 20 is missing. The text 19-21 is not consistent. I'ts like an e-mail by Amanda knox.
Grammar structures are inconsistent.
Topics are inconsistent.
Logical path is inconsistent.

Please review your judgement.
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:12 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

The sentece " ... - non collegato ad altre ..." at page 21 lacks the main verb if conneted with page 19. There can't be a statement with a missing verb.

The main topic and has changed bewtween 19 and 21: the topic they speak about is "attività" in 19 and something else "ed esso... contestato" which must be a logical concept that has to do with the absract concepts "collegamenti inferenziali".

Also the gender agreement - a masculine "collegato" and a neuter "esso" - doesn't fit with the previous main subject that is feminine "azione lesiva".
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:13 pm   Post subject: That very "elusive" word...   

The 411 wrote:
Can anyone tell me...what's the big problem in using the word "elusive?"


Jools wrote:
IMO ‘elusive’ is wrong because it does not tell me that the thief was unreal, is telling me the thief was: subtle, evasive, hard to catch…

Maybe you meant *illusive* (consisting of an illusion) or *allusive* (making an illusion)???

I think the best one so far is phantom thief.
:)


Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, Joooooooooooooooools! wa-)) No, I didn't mean the term illusive or allusive! wa-))

Lest you be under under illusion :) --I'm not suggesting the word "elusive" because... I like it best, or because it's the word that I, The 411, would have written had I written the report.

I'm merely offering it as the accurate translation of this word used by the writer-- in this context.

We all have our own preferences. And we're all willing to fight tooth and nail ta-)) for those preferences. fen-) Right? Or am I the only one who wants to do so? ss-)

But, joking aside--in the various (more than three) IT-EN dictionaries I've consulted rul-) , "ladro fantomatico" is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS translated as "elusive thief." Look online. Look at your unabridged IT-EN dictionaries. It's not just one isolated example. LOOK AT ALL OF THEM.

I'm only the messenger, here, folks!

A dictionary definition--for everyone's edification:

"ELUSIVE" means:

1. Tending to elude capture, perception, comprehension, or memory: "an invisible cabal of conspirators, each more elusive than the archterrorist [himself]" (David Kline).
2. Difficult to define or describe: "Failures are more finely etched in our minds than triumphs, and success is an elusive, if not mythic, goal in our demanding society" (Hugh Drummond).

DON'T MAKE ME BEG!! w-((

No matter how much we fight, and what the eventual "verdict" is...siamo amici come sempre, vero???? wg-))
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:13 pm   Post subject: Re: That very "elusive" word...   

The 411 wrote:
No matter how much we fight, and what the eventual "verdict" is...siamo amici come sempre, vero???? wg-))


I think it's great that everyone here puts so much time, energy, effort and passion into the translations.
It shows that we do not write just n'importe quoi.

That said, I am putting together a tactical assault team to breach the Cassazione offices and recover the missing page 20 (and, while I'm at it, I'll change that "fantomatico" sentence on the original file to something I like).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:11 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Yummi wrote:
Clander wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Clander, I checked with a journalist. Page 20 is not missing. The document is mis-paginated.


wtf)

If page 20 is not missing, then that sentence takes the cake for the most poorly written sentence in the report.

This sentence is a guessing game:

Ed anche se si deve rilevare, come hanno correttamente ritenuto i giudici di merito, che successivamente all'azione omicidiaria e sopravvenuta una attività tesa a simulare un tentativo di furto, che i giudici di merito e la difesa dello stesso ricorrente convengono essere avvenuta ad opera di altri e non dell'imputato, non si vede la ragione perché la simulazione dovesse comprendere la svestizione del corpo ormai senza vita della vittima e l'accanimento sul suo corpo per contusioni e ferite che deponevano chiaramente per una protratta azione lesiva antecedente alla coltellata mortale e che - deve ribadirsi - non collegato alle altre circostanze ed ai collegamenti inferenziali operati dai giudici.

The first time I read that sentence I thought that the "collegato" was just a typo (instead of "collegati").
But the sentence still made no sense.
All theories welcome.


Skep, page 20 is missing. The text 19-21 is not consistent. I'ts like an e-mail by Amanda knox.
Grammar structures are inconsistent.
Topics are inconsistent.
Logical path is inconsistent.

Please review your judgement.



It's not a judgement - it is what I was told by the person who gave me the document. If you and Yummi can use your ingenuity to get to the bottom of it, please do. I have exhausted my only avenue. Maybe The Machine can help. He's the one who provided the version we worked from. The person who gave me the document did so separately and after we had already begun.

I'm happy to go with whatever you all say.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:34 pm   Post subject: Re: RUDY'S FAILED FINAL APPEAL: MAIN DISCUSSION   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:

(..)
It's not a judgement - it is what I was told by the person who gave me the document. If you and Yummi can use your ingenuity to get to the bottom of it, please do. I have exhausted my only avenue. Maybe The Machine can help. He's the one who provided the version we worked from. The person who gave me the document did so separately and after we had already begun.

I'm happy to go with whatever you all say.


If the person who made photocopies in Rome is ********, I can easilly check with ***** to see what was the origin of the error. What I think is the photocopy from which they made was already flawed with a the missing page.
There is no doubt this document has a missing page. Probably the page was missing in the very first copy that was made from the document at the clerk/lawyer's office.

The statement around the borderline between the pages 19-21 appears to very long and complex.
However it can be analyzed and its structure made clear.


[p. 19 end ] " (..) Ed anche se si deve rilevare, come hanno correttamente ritenuto i giudici di merito, che successivamente all'azione omicidiaria è sopravvenuta una attività tesa a simulare un tentativo di furto, che i giudici di merito e la difesa dello stesso ricorrente convengono essere avvenuta ad opera di altri e non dell'imputato, non si vede la ragione perché la simulazione dovesse comprendere la svestizione del corpo ormai senza vita della vittima e l'accanimento sul suo corpo per contusioni e ferite che deponevano chiaramente per una protratta azione lesiva antecedente alla coltellata mortale e che - deve ribadirsi - non [p. 21] collegato alle altre circostanze ed ai collegamenti inferenziali operati dai giudici. Ed esso non può essere, con possibilità di successo, contestato dalla difesa che in tanto può rilcvarne l'equivocità in quanto disancori il dato stesso dall' intero compendio probatorio valorizzato dalla corte di merito. "

The above sentence does not make sense. The main subjects are la ragione (principal) and and azione lesiva (first subordinate). There is another subordinate on the same level of azione lesiva, the one that comes first with attività as subject, which is complete and controlled by the verb è sopravvenuta.
But no verb controls the clause that has azione lesiva as a subject. There is no verb to control this sentence, thus there is no sentence and this subordinate makes no sense.
Moreover, collegato cannot be linked to azione lesiva, neither can esso in the following clause. These are not in accord with the subject.
Moreover look at the subsequent sentence:


" Ed ancora non ha pregio richiamare. a riscontro della versione offerta dall' imputato, le lesioni alle mani come risultanti, dalle fotografie scattate nell' occasione del suo arresto in Gernania: i giudici di Perugia hanno sottolineato il fatto che quelle ferite all' indomani delI' uccisione di Meredith non furono riscontrate dagli amici ( Alex Crudo. Philip Maly, Crudo Sofia Concetta) che il Guede non mancò di avvicinare, il 2.11.2007, prima della sua fuga, il giorno ancora successivo, in Germania".

The topic of this sentence is evidence of details of the story by Rudi Guede, in particular the cuts on his hand. This topic is not related to the inferences about the sexual violence and about what aspects are part of a staging, which is the topic of the first sentence until the end of p. 19.

Also, notice that when put altogether, the first sentence with the lines of p. 21 doesn't make sense and the topic is unclear.

*

The two pages cannot be linked to each other. Something is missing. We cannot know if it is a page, a few lines, a paragraph.
Top Profile 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 2 of 2 [ 304 posts ]


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 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 


28,664,896 Views