Thread: The Collapsing Case Against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito

First the prosecution's "super witness" could not have seen AK and RS on the date alleged and he is found to be a heroin addict. Then the prosecution's main evidence seems non existent or unusable. Now it is revealed in one of Italy's most significant magazines that the person that claimed to have heard screaming on the night of the murder is hard of hearing and has spent time in a mental hospital.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/20...ele-sollecito/

Perhaps this is why they have two trials in Italy.

i still say Galileo was guilty as sin

Not sure if I read it here or in the Wiki article but a person is not considered guilty in Italy until the appeals process is over.
It seems like Italy has a pretty fair system(at a glance). Attempting to try her here or in the US media seems like another attempt to say that our way is the only way and because she's a US citizen, she's automatically innocent.
We tried that when some rich kid got caned somewhere in the Far East years ago. He was guilty and he deserved it because that is their law and penalty. Tuff nutz.

As far as Amanda Knox's case goes ... it ain't over yet so we really don't know if she's guilty or not, do we?

Doug

I have to wonder how much you've read about this case. While I haven't followed it as closely as some,
there's no doubt there's some real questions about how this was prosecuted, and from what I've read, doubts as to her guilt.
That said - I don't feel I've got a dog on this fight; it'll wend its way through the Italian legal system, as we'll see. And if she's
still found 'guilty', so be it.

But as far as 'don't know if she's guilty or not' - you might note she's been in prison since first arrested. So it's been 'kinda over'; but
perhaps she'll be exonerated.

Originally Posted by botebum

Not sure if I read it here or in the Wiki article but a person is not considered guilty in Italy until the appeals process is over.
It seems like Italy has a pretty fair system(at a glance). Attempting to try her here or in the US media seems like another attempt to say that our way is the only way and because she's a US citizen, she's automatically innocent.
We tried that when some rich kid got caned somewhere in the Far East years ago. He was guilty and he deserved it because that is their law and penalty. Tuff nutz.

As far as Amanda Knox's case goes ... it ain't over yet so we really don't know if she's guilty or not, do we?

Doug

Anyone who has troubled himself to study what has happened in this sorry story will know the answer.

Nobody is saying that injustice cannot happen in the US...it obviously does...look to the lacrosse players in NC. And also...nobody is saying that because Amanda is American she must be innocent...Americans are put in jail overseas commonly. You do not necessarily hear problems with that. Oh, and by the way...Sollecito is Italian.

Originally Posted by George Jung

But as far as 'don't know if she's guilty or not' - you might note she's been in prison since first arrested. So it's been 'kinda over'; but
perhaps she'll be exonerated.

It's not uncommon for an accused murderer to be denied bail especially when they are the citizen of another country and considered a flight risk. As I said, a person is not considered guilty in Italy until the appeals process is over.
It ain't rocket science George. It's their legal system.

If there's been mistakes made in the prosecution of the case then this is the defense's opportunity to bring it to light and see that it's corrected. Italy is not a third world country with a bunch of witch doctors determining guilt. There's likely as much chance of her receiving a fair trial there as here.

It would be stupid of me to try to make a case for her guilt or innocense. I did not sit in the courtroom and hear all the evidence. By the same token, it would be stupid of you to do it too.

Doug

Originally Posted by botebum

It would be stupid of me to try to make a case for her guilt or innocense. I did not sit in the courtroom and hear all the evidence. By the same token, it would be stupid of you to do it too.

Doug

This is a common line used by members of the pro-guilt crowd. I suppose one can never know if a trial was conducted fairly unless you sat in the audience. Right?

Originally Posted by pcford

...look to the lacrosse players in NC. And also...

The lacrosse players were eventually vindicated because our system has a process that allows it to happen.
Gee whiz, so does Italy.

Can't help but notice that you are from Seattle. I'd guess that given the same amount of information, a person from Seattle is more likely to think she's innocent than a person from, say, New Orleans.

Doug

Originally Posted by pcford

This is a common line used by members of the pro-guilt crowd. I suppose one can never know if a trial was conducted fairly unless you sat in the audience. Right?

I am not pro-guilt or pro-innocent. One cannot make an informed decision without the facts, Right?

Doug

Originally Posted by botebum

The lacrosse players were eventually vindicated because our system has a process that allows it to happen.
Gee whiz, so does Italy.

Why are you presuming that I am criticizing the way Italian justice system is set up? There are elements of the Italian system that some people think are better.

Originally Posted by botebum

Can't help but notice that you are from Seattle. I'd guess that given the same amount of information, a person from Seattle is more likely to think she's innocent than a person from, say, New Orleans.

Doug

You will note that when I became interested in this case, most people thought Amanda Knox was guilty. Yes, Americans, even Americans from Seattle commit crimes abroad and suffer for it.

Please don't set up straw men....

As I understand it, Doug, in the Italian system, the defense isn't allowed the usual procedures/protocols we're accustomed to in our system; as I understood it, they can't introduce evidence, and the prosecution and judge determine the line of questioning. I don't believe it's jury trial, either.

You might try reading about the first trial before casting aspersions my way.

Originally Posted by botebum

I am not pro-guilt or pro-innocent. One cannot make an informed decision without the facts, Right?

Doug

There are plenty of facts out there to inspect. It is nonsense to state that the only people that are entitled to have an opinion are those that sat in the courtroom audience.

Come on.

Originally Posted by George Jung

As I understand it, Doug, in the Italian system, the defense isn't allowed the usual procedures/protocols we're accustomed to in our system; as I understood it, they can't introduce evidence, and the prosecution and judge determine the line of questioning. I don't believe it's jury trial, either.

You might try reading about the first trial before casting aspersions my way.

Doc,
I am not aware of the points you are making in regard to Italian jurisprudence; I don't think you are correct.
Also, it is a jury trial. The judge of trial sits with a group of lay people. Together they determine guilt or innocence.

I haven't gone back to the last (really fun!) thread on this, but as I recall, the judge/prosecution have significant leeway in terms of what evidence was allowed, and who the defense could call for rebuttal/evidence. It struck a chord, as it was remarkably different from our system.

As far as a jury - I'll take your word on it.

Originally Posted by George Jung

I haven't gone back to the last (really fun!) thread on this, but as I recall, the judge/prosecution have significant leeway in terms of what evidence was allowed, and who the defense could call for rebuttal/evidence. It struck a chord, as it was remarkably different from our system.

As far as a jury - I'll take your word on it.

For me, the problem is not the structure of the Italian legal system, but how it was used (better said misused).

I will admit it...I am so looking forward to that group of supercilious pro-guilt people...mostly Brits, ACB, Down the Creek, Stazzer-Newt and others having to eat their words. And it's coming. It is one of the things that get me up in the morning.
Ok, sure, I am a small man, but I sure as heck am enjoying this denouement. So sweet.

We can take that ornery streak outta ya

but you'll only be about 4' tall when we're done...

BTW, I like ACB, and being at odds over this, with the resultant 'fallout', is so unfortunate, to me.
I'm not interested in a 'gotcha', but am curious to see how this one plays out. I'd be just as interested
were this a US case. And I recognize that, had this not been so high profile, I'd never have known differently.

How high are the bridges in Italy? I'll guess 3'11'.

Originally Posted by George Jung

..

BTW, I like ACB, and being at odds over this, with the resultant 'fallout', is so unfortunate, to me.

I liked ACB as well. We had private boat-related conversations. In this affair, I presumed his Oxbridge education might allow him to rise above the level of the screaming British tabloids. But no.

And there is the little problem of ACB calling me a sociopath.

Sociopath? I missed that one.....

That makes it problematic!

As far as education - in my personal experience, it hasn't prevented me from stepping in it, or putting my foot in my mouth, sometimes sequentially (troubling image, eh?).
Not making excuses - somethings just sets some folk off, even if it seems inappropriate to someone else. I have no idea why this Italian case arouses such passion in the Brits that frequent this site. It's unfortunate, especially since (I think) none of us has a stake in this case. Why the passion? It's interesting, certainly, but at the end of the day, affects none of us personally.

The case arouses very strong passions on either side...one would not have to dig very far on Google to find the nest of the opposing sides.

Many reasons for the persecution of Amanda Knox have been posited...class jealousy, anti-Americanism, misogyny...so many others that went into the witches brew.
I have no doubt there will be books on that topic in the future. But for now, overturning the injustice is the primary concern.

And by the way, not all Brits were anti-Amanda...it's just that some were so rude and condescending about their anti Amanda beliefs. And they were wrong.

By the way, ACB deleted his posts on the thread that was mentioned. However, I usually quoted him in my responses so the record is still there.

I may be 60 years old but these possibilities just brought me one step closer to " doing her " !!! Of course I would keep one eye open at all times !!

I prolly don't need to worry too much about that , though !!

Originally Posted by watson1990

I may be 60 years old but these possibilities just brought me one step closer to " doing her " !!! Of course I would keep one eye open at all times !!

You are a total waste of carbon.

You are prolly right. I know that my family would disagree with you but hey, who can argue with such logic and sheer intelligence.
If only we had more people like you populating the United States

It is unfortunate that my brother moved back east a few years ago. If not then the next time I visited him in Seattle I could come visit you,boy

the following c&p is from Frank Sfarza, who is based in Perugia and has attended the trial proceedings.
http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/20...rial.html#more

THE LAST DAYS OF MARIETTI
Leaks from the Works on Knife and Bra Clasp

So, there’s no DNA on the knife. According to indiscretions leaked from last Wednesday’s meeting, Conti & Vecchiotti tested it for blood. Nothing. There’s not a single red blood cell, not even in the crevice where the blade meets the handle. If this is true, then it’s what we’ve always said: the Marietti knife is not the murder weapon. And it will be official at the next hearing, May 21, when Conti & Vecchiotti will report in court.

The consultant for the prosecution, Giuseppe Novelli, did go to meeting in Conti & Vecchiotti’s department at Università La Sapienza. But he was immediately called from his own institute and had to go, so the meeting took place without him.
Conti and Vecchiotti worked on bra clasp and knife together with the parties experts and with Stefanoni.

The bra clasp was found corroded by mold, therefore, it’s compromised forever, and it was not possible to review that piece. It was stored in a plastic bag, so Stefanoni had to face some criticism about storing evidence the wrong way (it’s not the first piece that’s been rendered useless for the same reason). By the way, the result of this egregious storing mistake was, as usually mistakes are, favorable to the defendants, since no DNA could be found on the bra clasp. Not that it was expected, but now there’s only a piece of paper stating that on the bra clasp there was DNA. And same goes for the knife. What if the two pieces of paper are wrong?

The quantity of DNA found on the knife and, specifically, in the crevice, was deemed not enough to perform any reliable tests.
Conti proposed to test the minimal DNA found, with stronger reagents, but it seems that immediately the expert for Kercher, followed by Stefanoni, opposed the proposal!
We can’t be surprised anymore if they oppose a test which should be in their best interest to be performed (we remember, indeed, the reaction Maresca and Comodi had in court about the possible dismantling of the knife).
However, at that point, even the experts for Knox and Sollecito joined the opposition, and the extreme attempt, with stronger reagents, was not performed.

How Marietti was Saved from Destruction

The blade isn’t screwed to the handle, but rather the handle is fused around the iron of the blade and its spikes. Taking apart the blade from handle is impossible without completely destroying the knife. The scrubbing in the crevice was effective enough and no better result was expected from a knife completely dismantled. That’s why it was decided to not open the knife.

But there are other rumors leaking from La Sapienza University: the validity of Stefanoni’s original tests are now being questioned.
But it’s just a leak... We will know more about this later as it unfolds.

The end is close. I hope the proud accusers will not start disappearing now. Those who bragged to have found both Curatolo and Quintavalle; the experts who defined Toto perfectly lucid; the heroes of November 6... Stay with us, experts and heroes, in a while there will be many things to explain...

THE LAST LAUGHTER

This is going to make you laugh. Guess who the prosecution, now, thinks to be involved with the crime? Me. It’s no surprise. It’s perfectly consistent with everything else.
The great psychologists who thought that a girl first watches Amelie and then goes and kills her housemate must of course think that the one who writes about a crime is the criminal...
Indeed they got something in their hands; they found out that criminals know me. Will they manage to understand why I talk to criminals? No, there’s no hope.
Five cops, then, reported to have been beaten by me and they proved it with a medical certificate... Will the great judges be fooled again by a couple of cops and a piece of paper? Of course. It’s their specialty!

This is the local mind. Have you all now figured out why this judicial disaster happened?

I don't know when the final verdict will be delivered, but I hope it is soon. Then, perhaps, this venomous obsession can be laid to rest one way or another. At least this thread is phrased a little more carefully and less viciously than the earlier one, about a week ago, which seems to have been poofed by Scot almost as soon as it appeared

If anyone else does share pcford's obsession no doubt they can look up the original thread, and, indeed, subsequent hectoring threads initiated by pcford, to find out what was actually said and by whom.

Originally Posted by downthecreek

I don't know when the final verdict will be delivered, but I hope it is soon. Then, perhaps, this venomous obsession can be laid to rest one way or another. At least this thread is phrased a little more carefully and less viciously than the earlier one, about a week ago, which seems to have been poofed by Scot almost as soon as it appeared

If anyone else does share pcford's obsession no doubt they can look up the original thread, and, indeed, subsequent hectoring threads initiated by pcford, to find out what was actually said and by whom.

Unbelievable. "Venomous obsession" on MY part.

Somehow it is my fault. And there is an implication of an unnatural obsession on my part. It is the middle of the night right now, however, sometime tomorrow I will give the interested reader links to the original thread to which our friend Down the Creek refers. Then those that are interested can decide who among us might have been the most "venomous". At this point, I will only point out for my efforts I was called a sociopath.

DTC, your attitude is worse than I could have imagined. Your gracelessness is truly remarkable.

For those interested in the case, there will be a discussion of the persecution of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito at 4pm at Pigott Auditorium at Seattle University. In attendance with be significant people who have kept the evil of the prosecution's abuse of AK and RS before the public. Among others, former FBI agent Steve Moore and writer Candace Dempsey will be in attendance.

it is shocking and sickening to hear people tell me (here, and, in effect) that if I don't have blood relatives or other close ties in this case that it is none of my business...I see this as abuse of justice on stilts waiting to ambush the hapless traveler.

Why in the wide world would a trial and possible kangaroo court NOT be everyone's business???

Originally Posted by Phillip Allen

it is shocking and sickening to hear people tell me (here, and, in effect) that if I don't have blood relatives or other close ties in this case that it is none of my business...I see this as abuse of justice on stilts waiting to ambush the hapless traveler.

Why in the wide world would a trial and possible kangaroo court NOT be everyone's business???

Has not happened often, Phillip...but I have to say you are correct!