Monday, March 16, 2015

Probable Final Cassation Ruling In 10 Days: Likely Scenario For The Immediate Future

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Italian Justice Minister Andrea Orlando with Prime Minister Matteo Renzi


We reported previously that Prime Minister Renzi, the former mayor of Florence, has great trust in the court system there.

Cassation is expected to rule on Knox’s and Sollecito’s separate appeals against the Florence outcome (in which they yet again not-too-subtly edge one another between themselves and the flames) on Wednesday or Thursday of next week.

We have something of a consensus here upon what happens then and thereafter, with main inputs here from Italian watchers Popper and Yummi.

1. Cassazione will probably merely announce that the affirmation of conviction by the Nencini appeal court is legitimate from the point of view of Italian law and there will be nothing significant said on the merits of the case.

2. In final appeals Supreme Court justices simply confirm a sentence or not based exclusively on law points. The Cassazione motivation reports due within three months are not too important as they cannot be appealed anyway. A report may not be needed for extradition, the Massei + Nencini sentencing reports could be explanatory and legally correct enough in this case.

3. The execution of this decision would then be over to the Florence courts. If the Nencini confirmation of verdict and sentence is affirmed it will probably then be over to Prosecutor Crini and Judge Nencini, and an arrest warrant for Sollecito would be immediate.

4. There is a slight chance, perhaps 5% to 10%, that Sollecito might try to escape, as he seemed set on doing when he made it to the border on the same day as Judge Nencini’s 2014 ruling. On Italian TV he has been sounding very aggrieved with Amanda while not really winding back the strong case against himself. He lacks his passport and probably the secret stash of money to stay on the run indefinitely.

5. An arrest warrant for Knox, the other defendant, would normally be issued as soon as possible. If she is still located in the US she could be rapidly arrested and put in a holding cell. Based on other examples it is possible that her physical return to Italy could take as long as nine months, though the treaty promotes a fast-track meaning not upward of three months.

6. There is normally 45 days for the extradition papers/request from Dr Andrea Orlando, the Italian Minister of Justice, to be handed over by the Italian Embassy in Washington DC to the State Department, though there is allowance for that request time to be extended.

7. The evidence of course really is overwhelming and no single proof of foul play has ever been proven. Italian justice officials have relevant information they could share privately, such as the corruption of the Hellmann appeal alleged by Judge Chiari, Prosecutor Comodi and others, and such as Knox’s unsavory drug record which is normally a big no-no for the State Department. 

8. Comments made by the host and a magistrate on Italy’s Porta a Porta show last week suggests vagueness on the part of the Italian media and public about the Italy/United States extradition treaty. This treaty, which has always been faithfully observed previously by both countries, with no exceptions, is stark and minimalist and focuses on the paperwork and whether the national law was followed, as explained by lawyers James Raper and TomM. 

9. Assuming their final conviction, Sollecito’s arrest and return to prison will drive Italian public opinion, dormant for years but stirring as the Porta a Porta show suggested, to demand a quick extradition of Knox, who was the flatmate of Meredith the victim and without whom no murder would have taken place.

10. Probably very unlikely, but if there is sustained political resistance despite American media finally getting the facts right, the powers demanding extradition will build up immense pressure, and it will be world-wide pressure from the point of view of the US, not just Italy. All countries will be watching to see how the US behaves, and if their treaties are reliable or not.

The US relies heavily on the Italian government, which is currently a very strong one, on many other matters, and it has other extradition cases worldwide in motion or anticipated (think Snowden in Moscow) so it will be almost certainly be faithful to legality and precedent.

Knox smeared prison authorities in her book and directly caused the imprisonment of a drug-dealer which might be reasons she fears going back. Conceivably a negotiated outcome could result in Knox serving the rest of her time in an American prison to get round this. American prison? This would be nice for her family, but probably a lot less nice for Knox herself.

Knox has long been the pawn of an ugly family and bunch of parasites. Dont totally rule out her simply hopping on a plane to pay her dues and get away from them.




Comments

Exciting times ahead as we approach the final week. Italian media is starting to re-look at the case, summarizing it and pointing out to Sollecito’s separation strategy of defense.

Nothing yet as far as extradition, except for ex Judge Matone, a regular on Porta a Porta, who several times said no way we’ll get Amanda back. In the end Vespa surprisingly and much to my dismay agreed.

In the meantime both RS and his father insist that the only statement that counts is the one in front of Matteini where he doesn’t remember if AK went out or not. Last night in a longer interview on Sky News 24 RS says that because he was sleeping he cannot exclude nor confirm that Amanda went out.

He also says that he hasn’t spoken to Amanda, and rumour has it that they are not in good relations now… Probably because she must feel he’s throwing her under the bus while he blames her for everything that happened to him. He actually pretty much says this in the latest interview.

As far as extradition I completely agree with Popper and Yummi who are so well versed on legal proceedings and make them understandable to all.

There is absolutely no reason that anyone can think of why the U.S. would protect a fugitive with a final murder and sexual assault conviction. I think that those comments from Vespa, Judge Matone and some of the general audiences following the case who say she won’t be extradited have a certain irrational reverence to the US and think that the powerful country gets to make decisions that are above the law.

Perhaps they still feel the wound of the terrible Cermis gondola accident and the failure to extradite the soldiers. They however forget that soldiers on military missions or training do not fall under the very specific extradition treaty.

Certainly we will see a lot in the media because as of March 26th when convictions will be affirmed it will officially become the Amanda Knox Case (of extradition) and many lawyers, politicians and journalists will have lots to say given the high profile case.

As far as Italians those who think that people will stand to the idea of having an immigrant and an Italian both in prison while the American runs free are in for a big surprise. Let the ball start rolling and sweet Meredith get the Justice she deserves.

Posted by Kristeva on 03/16/15 at 10:02 AM | #

Italy never asked extradition of the pilots/soldiers of Cermis as an Italian court ruled they were under US jurisdiction, as per treaty, so there was no refusal, just nobody asked. Law was applied correctly.  The fact that later a US military court gave them ridiculous penalties is a problem of the US courts, they were guilty of reckless behaviour that ended with disaster and homicide and they destroyed evidence, part of it was saved only as an Italian prosecutor seized the plane that was being disassembled.  Some US authorities behaved shamefully but this is another story, has nothing to do with extradition.

Posted by Popper on 03/16/15 at 11:09 AM | #

Yummi/Popper - Great read. Nice to know that they will be coming for Knox quickly.

I have heard rumours that the Seattle police do regularly check up on Knox.  Do you know if there is any surveillance done on Sollecito?

At this point, does Nencini simply issue the warrant, or is he responsible for seeing it through?  Not sure how it works.

(This is speculation on your part), but do you see any real way of delaying extradition beyond a number of months?  Or is this all just white noise?

@ Kristeva.  Any chance that Sky News 24 interview has translations or subtitles? (My Italian is quite weak).  I am curious to see it, but don’t have a link.

The only statement that counts is the one in front of Judge Claudia Matteini - the one where he doesn’t remember if Amanda went out? 

Not doubting you at all, but this is twisted logic.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/rapidly_expanding_wiki_now_includes_sollecito_statement_6_nov/#comments

-So, the statement he made to Judge Hellmann doesn’t count?  (Amanda was at his apartment.)

-That he called to report the break in before the postal police showed up? (PP showed up at 12:30, he called in break in at 12:51). In fact, this discrepency is why he was called to the police station November 5th to begin with.

-He claims he was surfing the internet while Amanda went out, and received a call from his Dad. (Hpwever, the computer was not used at that time, and the call from Francesco was hours earlier).

-There was that bogus claim that he was at a party.

-On his book tour, he repeatedly says Amanda was with him that night.

-He has also says he doesn’t remember anything, probably from too much weed.

-On his July 1 2014 press conference, he now says Amanda was with him that evening, but not the night?  Likewise with the recent Porta a Porta interview.

-This B.S. claim that he believes in her innocence, but has questions for her, and wants to be tried separately?

-This B.S claim about interrogation torture (similar to the stunt Knox pulled), and offers of an illegal deal)? Raffaele’s Dad had enough sense to refute those claims.

*** Sorry Raffy, you don’t get to pick and choose ‘‘what statement counts’‘.

Posted by Chimera on 03/16/15 at 02:49 PM | #

Hi guys, speaking of extradition, I am a bit surprised that you are surprised that US can get away with *not* extraditing one of their own, see below a couple of links on the Van Goethem affair, where an extradition request had apparently been made (and not honored).

Time will tell, Knox is not a soldier, and Romania is not Italy.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread918316/pg1

http://kingofromania.com/2010/12/20/teo-peter-and-wikileaks/

Justice for Meredith.

Posted by Bjorn on 03/16/15 at 03:37 PM | #

Chimera, a prosecutor issues the warrant, normally the prosecutor corresponding to the Court that has issued the verdict of merit convicting the defendants.  That Court is called the “execution judge”, overseeing various aspects of the execution phase.  Once in prison, control is taken over by surveillance judge.  Cassazione is never execution judge as it does not issue verdicts of merit (only cancels or confirms them).

Posted by Popper on 03/16/15 at 04:06 PM | #

Hi Bjorn

We are not talking military or diplomatic (which have international rules of their own) in the Knox case. We may not like those rules but they allow embassies and foreign bases to function. I give you examples.

1) One is the various posts on TJMK on what happened to Robert Lady. He did not have immunity, being CIA under cover. The Italians did not ask for him back, but the US has given him a very hard time anyway, to the point he was talking of suing them.

2) When I was on the permanent staff at United Nations headquarters in NYC, which has more diplomatic missions than any other city in the world, staff of foreign missions were incessantly in trouble with the local law, some at felony level, some misdemeanor. Often there were real victims.

NYPD really would have liked to have arrested many of them, but the State Department and US mission to the UN stuck to the rules and were incessantly smoothing the waters and brokering outcomes. They were good at it.

By the way, the US is by design pretty low-key in international forums, and rarely if ever thumps the table. From what I’ve seen worldwide, I’d say the US is much more sinned against than a sinner. I am glad I was not a diplomat or a spy, life for them can be pretty heart-stopping.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/16/15 at 04:11 PM | #

Thank you Popper.  Clears things up.

I remember what you had previously said about Cassazione not being an evidence court - that they only review points of law.  And defendants don’t talk either?!  So, since the Knox/Sollecito appeals were huge, and focused on evidence/contamination claims, would any of this even be admissible?

So this appeal would be nowhere near as comprehensive as the Nencini appeal in Florence? 

A Corte di Cassazione hearing would take how long then?  A week? A day? An hour?

What are the chances, if any, that Cassazione increases the sentences for filing frivilous appeals, (or in Knox’s case), not showing up, as Judge Nencini did?

They are lucky, Italy’s 2 automatic appeals.  In Canada, they wouldn’t even have gotten a provincial court of appeal to look at it.  Or a US/UK court.  And no-shows would get immediate arrest warrants.

Posted by Chimera on 03/16/15 at 04:40 PM | #

On Sollecito: it is quite normal to keep an eye on a guy who is about to be convicted for murder and is free but without passport. However they cannot watch every step he takes.  Most people just report to police after final conviction. There are a few cases of people who escaped last minute in same situation, most are caught immediately some a little later, a very few never.  Best time to escape is three to five days before Cassazione rules. I remember the Versilia case (murder of Luciano Iacopi), one of the two defendants got a gun and jumped from a window when they came to arrest him ... in the Ludwig case Marco Furlan took a bicycle and escaped from home arrest [with obligation to sign at police station], he was found in Crete few years later by a tourist.  He was working in a rent a car at the airport and tourist took a photo of him and gave it to police.

I think what Pete mentioned, 5-10%, is a high probability but since RS was near the border last time around he could certainly do it again.

A guy who was never found is Andrea Ghira of the Circeo murder case in 1975. He was one of the three “sons of good families” who savagely beat and raped two girls, killing one of the two, Rosaria Lopez.  The other, famous Donatella Colasanti, pretended to be dead and was left in a trunk. She sent all to jail in a very dramatic trial but Ghira escaped, completely disappeared.

Nowadays living on the run is much more difficult with internet, traceable bank accounts and phones, credit cards etc. Need to have money, lots of it and at destination not sent later, protection, balls etc.  RS could certainly escape but IMHO he will not last much at large, he is a baby.

Posted by Popper on 03/16/15 at 04:47 PM | #

Some of the points of merit submitted by defense lawyers of Knox and Sollecito are in fact points of law as they are presented as “manifest illogicality of the motivations of the verdict” ... an unlikely call after all these years.  A Cassazione session is in fact only on points of law, lasts a few hours and gets verdict the same day (the morning after at most).

Defendants are not admitted to participate (can sit in the public) as it is a strictly technical appeal, witnesses are not heard, only lawyers, procurator and relator judge. Cassazione can only cancel or confirm all or part of a sentence of merit, cannot establish or change prison sentences [only ask a lower court to change if they are wrong by law]. verb “Cassare” = to cancel

Posted by Popper on 03/16/15 at 05:12 PM | #

For Chimera,

I think I’m correct in saying that there is a subtitled copy of the TG24 interview with Sollecito here.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=183421#p183421

Just supposing Sollecito does decamp, how would he fare if his destination was Tel Aviv?

I ask only because this is a non EC destination served by the airline for which Greta, one of his girlfriends,  works/worked.

Posted by Sallyoo on 03/16/15 at 05:33 PM | #

Hi Sallyoo

I am not sure the EC has any role in this. Italy and Israel have had an extradition treaty since 1956 (both countries are real perp magnets so their marshalls have been kept busy).

The bigger deal than the EC (under which much law and most enforcement and justice is still a thing for each country) is Interpol, on which we have several times posted. Here’s company Knox could find herself keeping.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_unsavory_company_knox_would_be_foolish_to_aspire_to/

It was a Red Notice that got Robert Lady skeltering out of Panama - Italy and Panama did not have an extradition treaty. Although “safe” in the US he gets such a rough time in the US that he has applied to the President of the Italian Republic for a pardon to get the Red Notice lifted. It’s pending.

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/sep/cia-italy-robert-seldon-lady.pdf
http://www.redstate.com/diary/trsmiami/2013/08/13/italy-should-pardon-robert-seldon-lady/

A future pardon for Knox? I dont see it. Italy is essentially a kind country, and usually moves carefully and with a very light touch.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/human_rights_group_human_rights_watch_gives_an_approving_nod_to_italy/

But it does have even more weapons than Popper and Yummi listed including more prosecutions of Knox coming up. And this one, thanks to those helpful Americans.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/US_Measures_Available_To_Italy/

Those helpful Americans are also prone to be litigious, and many US lawyers might jump at their day in the sun, suing her, on behalf of all those that Knox’s pack have willfully damaged.

Maybe Knox should sue her father. She has little reason to like him, and he got Marriott, Bremner, Heavey, Moore, Sforza, Fischer and co into this - to help him, not her, as we see it - and made Italy far more unforgiving.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/16/15 at 06:49 PM | #

@ Peter - Re: Sue Dad?

Sounds like an amusing idea.  Yes, he get get Marriott and the other folks into the clown car.  Yes, they did substantial damage to her case.

However, Curt has the built in defense that Amanda lied about Meredith’s death.  As we have demonstrated here so overwhelmingly, she has lied day in and day out, and there is huge evidence that points to her guilt, and to Raffy’s.  As you mentioned, Edda has somewhat distanced herself, saying she only repeated what Amanda told her.

Knox could have owned up to what she did—Hell, she would probably be on parole by now, or close to it, if she had gone for lesser charges.  So Daddy isn’t only to blame.

There’s also that little issue of premeditation.

And with her prior calunnia conviction, and other pending trials, she can’t exactly take the stand.

The idea of suing on behalf of those that Knox and her Groupies have wronged, that sounds like a far better idea. 

*** Just a thought *** up here in Canada there are far more legal services and forms and free information available than ever before.  You don’t need to be a lawyer or paralegal to draft your own court forms or do your own research.  If you can use ‘‘google’’ you can do legal research. I’ve done it, for myself and for TJMK.  And the U.S.A. probably has similar resources available.

Get rid of Ted Simon and Bob Barnett.  Get them disbarred.  Also, get some heavy fines for Marriott’s liar-for-hire business.  Since the Knoxes/Sollecitos won’t pay the Kerchers, get Simon & Schuster, and HarperCollins to. That would go a long way towards restoring some confidence.  Just my 0.02.

@ Sallyoo - Got the link, thank you .... wow, it is yet another mass of contradictions.  I’ll make a post of it.

Someone should tell this guy, stop digging when in a hole.  Don’t grab a bigger shovel.

Posted by Chimera on 03/16/15 at 09:20 PM | #

Hi Chimera and Sallyoo

Here’s the transcript [now corrected, please see sentence in bold below] of that RS interview yesterday which Eric posted on PMF dot Org (I asked him if he has others; we might have them on the new RS Liewatch page). I reformatted it.

Added please

Roberto Tallei Interviews Raffaele Sollecito March, 15, 2015.

Raffaele, on March 25, 2015, the Cassation will confirm or reduce your sentence. You’ve always claimed your innocence… yet the Italian public is largely culpabilist. If you both are not guilty, who did it?

I don’t know what the public thinks. But there is de facto a person in prison… and it seems everybody has forgotten about his involvement. There’s a truck load of evidence on his back… and loads of circumstantial evidence on him. It’s not a whodunit case… where the judges still have to find out, there is someone. He was on the crime scene, he saw, he did what he says he did. The judges are not left without a perpetrator if we didn’t do it. Why should there be such suspects so tied to the case, designated defendants? They should rather examine the proofs. What’s the evidence, or the reason that brought about, my and Amanda’s arrest. Me, my family, my defence, have made clear many times… a whole lot of elements that were never taken into account.

Are you a victim of judicial harassment?

I don’t feel persecuted, I was acquitted once. I don’t consider that the judges are malicious. They’re just persons committing errors… whose callousness is lamentable. For example, precisely… in the Florentine judgment, for example… a footprint for which I was arrested in the first place. That was 8 years ago. First, they said it was my print… then during the investigation my consultants helped them find out… that it was Rudy Guede’s. And now the Florentine judgment… out of the blue declares, that print is Amanda’s. Sometimes the judges handle situations… and it’s pitiful how they screw up. Especially when people’s lives are at stake. They can’t be that neglectful or superficial… in their speech, in their verdict.

You’re aware that you’d be the only one paying for that crime. While Amanda in the Sates has reached stardom.

I’m not the one who chose to hang out with Rudy Guede. Whom I’ve never seen, and I don’t know. I hung out with Amanda Knox for five days. I did my choices, that reflecting who I am. For the truth, for what I said. In tune with my behavior, I have nothing to hide. I made my choices knowing I’ve done nothing wrong. I’m a stranger to the case. There’s nothing I should fear. Of course nothing is within my control. Eventually, others judge, I can’t chose. I don’t hold the reins of my own life. That is horrible, obviously. Yet there’s no one I can blame for that.

Considering the prosecution, you could pin it all on Amanda. Have you ever entertained that possibility?

How could I build up such hypothesis? I don’t have ground, I wasn’t there. I can’t say if she went out. I can’t be sure if she went out that evening. I don’t have any facts to back it up. But she might have gone out. Sure. -Introduced Rudy into Meredith’s place. Anything could have happened, what I said. I told the judge at the preliminary investigation. They asked me about Amanda particularly about this. And I said I don’t know if she went out that night. And while I was restricted (prison) in the following months. My doubts had reached such a point… that I didn’t have any validation. I felt it was my duty. To expound that her going back to her place was improbable. And today? -Today, my memories are still these. I can’t remember if she went out. I can’t confirm that she didn’t get out. I don’t remember. -

But you don’t rule it out.

I don’t because I don’t remember.

After your arrest did you ask Amanda about all the inconsistencies? Her accusing Lumumba, her diary.

We had rare opportunities… when we were incarcerated… to talk about such topic… sensitive to both of us. She just told me what she said in court. She was cross-examined in 1st instance and explained… her general behavior… all the issues we discuss here. She told me as she told them. What can I add to that? Sincerely, I’d like to know how I got involved in that story. The way they claim that whatever is on Amanda, is on me. But where does Amanda mention me? When they take this evidence at face value… what Amanda wrote in her diary: She locates herself on the crime scene that night… that she was in the kitchen, heard screaming and such. She said it was like a confused dream. She’d said that to the investigators… during the questioning at the police station. Now if they take this at face value… she doesn’t mention me at all, not even as a shadow. I’d like to understand… if that is true, what do I have to do with it?

Looking back at it, do you think you made mistakes… for example, the cuddles in front of the house, right after the murder… buying sexy lingerie in the following days.

The fact is, I was in my twenties. But we were not taking the situation lightly. In front of the house I gave her kisses of comfort… they weren’t kisses of passion. It’s not an odd behavior… it’s a kissing scene repeated 10,000 times. It’s not about a strange passion. As for the lingerie, the house was blocked… Amanda had nothing to wear so we went shopping… for clothing, not for that specifically. This is when the media started their spin. The problem is that the media sought sensation. Then there was Amanda’s attitude and behavior… that the judges took as evidence. And I realize, the most absurd fact, after all these years: I was incriminated… involved and dragged, then I was condemned. Just because I acted as a dutiful citizen. As an honest citizen I gave the alarm. I was the first to try to understand what had happened. Because Amanda was talking about it. I called the Carabinieri… my family. The first to be alarmed… and behave as an honest citizen. Had I behaved according to the “omertà“… I wouldn’t have been involved in the case. It’s so sad because I haven’t done wrong.

Why that oppression? You spoke about the investigators pursuing you.

RS: Because we were there first. -Strong pressure… Amanda’s behavior was unusual… and she drew a lot of attention. As far as I’m concerned. I rushed in for her sake. They incriminated me by proxy. Shifting all her responsibility to me, because somehow… I didn’t do what I should have… I didn’t give elements…  to the investigators. To close the investigation after Amanda.
Lately have you spoken on the phone, Skype?

I haven’t heard of her in a long time… and I don’t feel the need. We spoke a couple of times, that was long ago. That evening I was at home on my computer. I was always home, I know nothing about the crime. Everything concerning Amanda Knox, she has to see to it. Sad… the way fate has it… the situation turned out that night. She spent most of the evening with me, but… it doesn’t result in me giving her an alibi, or she, me. What engages my person, my actions… obviously, as for my rights… they’re distant from her position.

Next March 26, after the audience, you’ll be 31… it could be your first day back in prison. Is your mind set to that eventuality?

Indeed, there is fear. But I shouldn’t be afraid of… being… somehow… I’ve done my utmost already. I face the situation to the best… hoping that the facts, the documents… the proofs, what was said and heard. In any case, if they realized the mistakes… the absurdities, hundreds of absurdities in that case… and gave me a chance at recovering my life. I have that hope, I live for that hope. Of course I fear the worst. But I don’t have a vote.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/16/15 at 09:43 PM | #

There’s a book by Paul Ekman called ‘Telling Lies’. One of the things he says is that as time passes it becomes easier for the liar to maintain the lie; they’ve had plenty of time to get their story straight.
Raffaele Sollecito seems to be becoming more confident and animated in his interviews.  Very different from years ago.

Posted by DavidB on 03/17/15 at 05:17 AM | #

Re the RS interview quoted above there’s one correction to the translation, now shown in bold.

RS says it was RS that Knox hung out with, not Guede. The rest is said to be correct.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/17/15 at 11:52 AM | #

Someone at Venture Capital Post said Amanda Knox’s appeal to the ECHR had been rejected.

I have no knowledge of that, but this is just the minor appeal to ECHR for her calunnia conviction, to avoid paying Patrick his measly settlement and convince whomever she isn’t a convicted felon, she was physically and psychologically ‘tortured’, quack quack.

The next appeal to ECHR will be on the murder conviction, based on the claim she was ‘pre judged’ and convicted on the basis of evidence at Rudy Guede’s trial, an ingredient of her and Sollecito’s appeal to the Italian Supreme Court, where it will receive short shrift, since it was already addressed in various forms in the 2008 and 2013 Supreme Court Rulings.

I believe this will happen at ECHR as well, if the appeals are accepted at all.

Posted by Ergon on 03/17/15 at 01:50 PM | #

Hi Ergon

Quack quack indeed. Good news if it proves true. I imagine you will find out.

Have you any idea WHAT evidence at Guede’s trial they claim somehow impacted Massei? I see none at all.

Guede did not even testify - and they called witness after witness after witness against him, which as he wasnt there in court he could not rebut! If anyone has a ECHR case it might be Guede against them as his appeals were not done.

Read the Micheli report and there is almost no mention of them, most is in Brians summaries here in 2009. Almost exclusively Micheli concentrates on the autopsy and what was found in the house.

It was the Ricciarelli panel way back in late Nov 2007 which first said it had to have been a pack attack.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/17/15 at 02:23 PM | #

I hope Amanda Knox is arrested soon as possible after the Italian Supreme Court confirms her convictions for murder and sexual assault next week.

I also hope that the Kerchers’ lawyers Francesco Maresca, Serena Perna and Vieri Fabiani as well the prosecutors involved in the case ensure that the Italian government promptly requests Amanda Knox’s immediate arrest and extradition.

Sex offenders Cyril Smith and Jimmy Savile were allowed to get away with their vile crimes because certain people in authority looked the other way and didn’t what do what they should have done. This must now be allowed to happen with Amanda Knox. She is not above the law and the fact she is a white, American woman who committed her crimes abroad doesn’t mean she should given immunity.

The British Prime Minister David Cameron and the British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond should seek reassurances from John Kerry that he will honour the extradition treaty between the US and Italy and extradite Knox.

Posted by The Machine on 03/17/15 at 02:52 PM | #

Nicky Woolf from The US Guardian is planning to write an article about next week’s hearing at the Italian Supreme. He’s contacted Amanda Knox and Michelle Moore:

@michellesings Hi! I’m a writer for the Guardian. Would love to chat with you about the upcoming Amanda Knox appeal. How do I contact you?

https://twitter.com/NickyWoolf/status/577884448777203712

@amamaknox hi - am looking to speak with you for the Guardian, if you’d be up for that. Have sent an email to Ken with details.

https://twitter.com/NickyWoolf/status/577600880909897729

Posted by The Machine on 03/17/15 at 03:16 PM | #

So the Knox friendly Guardian will be writing a Knox friendly article? That’ll teach the patriarchy smile

Posted by Ergon on 03/17/15 at 03:41 PM | #

Still, Nicky Woolf does write well http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/tsarnaev-defense-focuses-on-the-why-as-jury-faces-question-of-life-or-death?CMP=share_btn_tw

“Tsarnaev defense focuses on ‘the why’ as jury faces question of life or death”

I doubt he’ll be covering Amanda Knox’s appeal since he already is covering the Tsarnaev trial in Boston; maybe he’s looking for a reaction shot from Michelle?

Posted by Ergon on 03/17/15 at 07:10 PM | #

@ DavidB - That makes sense, the person has had a lot more time to rehearse, and practice.  So Sollecito may be getting more animated and confident.

The problem (for him anyway), is that there is a very extensive record of him—and Knox—telling a bunch of different stories.  In fact, with each story, he adds new contradictions.  So, he may fool a stranger, but anyone who really knows the case will pick up on the extra lies. 

So, he is digging himself deeper, but doing so with confidence?! Fruitcake.

@ Peter - Thank you for the correction, but he knew Amanda 7 days, not 5.  He still cannot get his dates straight.

@ Ergon - Take everything the Venture Capital Post says with an ounce of salt (yes I found the quote you mean). 

An earlier article of theirs said Knox and Sollecito had their 28 year sentences overturned.  Then in January 2014, a retrial was ordered to take place in March 2015.  Did we skip a few appeals?

So much for fact checking.

Posted by Chimera on 03/17/15 at 10:31 PM | #

@ DavidB - as for the whole confidence thing, Sollecito may have the ‘‘courage’’ to appear on TV, but he is too much of a wimp and coward to appear and testify in front of ‘ANY’ judge. 

Giving spontaneous declarations is not the same thing as answering questions.

He refused to testify at the 2008 pretrial (Judge Micheli), 2009 trial (Judge Massei), the first appeal in 2011 (Judge Hellmann), the redo of the first appeal in 2013/2014 (Judge Nencini), nor in his book hearings in 2015.  Of course, these judges and prosecutors likely have the full record available to cross examine him on.

Sollecito lied to Bruno Vespa (Porta a Porta), when he said he was never asked to be questioned.  He was asked each time, but each time he refused.

Confident yes—but a slimy, lying coward nonetheless

Posted by Chimera on 03/17/15 at 10:44 PM | #

Chimera, agreed.

You’ve probably already seen this but just to add https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QeRH_dGE0

At 47 mins and 34 seconds he says “because I feel innocent” then he follows up with “because I am innocent”

Also, at 1 hour 14 mins and 40 secs he says “I’m humbly asking that they (the Kercher family) look into the facts. All what’s in the proofs and circumstantial evidence. That they analyze the truths in all that. Not just a theory that doesn’t hold water”.

‘doesn’t hold water’??  Why doesn’t he say “THEORY WHICH ISN’T TRUE”

Raffaele Sollecito is all “this wasn’t done properly, that wasn’t done properly”. Contamination etc etc etc.

Surely an innocent person would just emphasize what he was doing.  Rather than that “it’s all their fault”.

Posted by DavidB on 03/18/15 at 06:13 AM | #

@DavidB

Quite - they have always been their own barrack-room lawyers vis-a-vis “evidence” etc. That indicates their congenitally deep arrogance , stupidity and absolute lack of remorse.

Their strong aim is to get away with it. As you say, innocent people leave their defence to their lawyers. Those defendants who don’t betray deep anxiety arising from knowledge of their guilt.

Posted by Odysseus on 03/18/15 at 01:16 PM | #

Yesterday I saw that there’s a new, special edition of “People” magazine that’s all about murderers… and guess whose picture is on the cover along with other convicted murderers?

You guess it - obKnoxious!  Yay!

I was shocked and thrilled (very pleased) to see her included by an American magazine.  It cost nearly $20. CAD, so I didn’t buy it, but if someone else reads the piece, I’d love to hear how they cover her story.

Posted by all4justice on 03/18/15 at 04:10 PM | #

BTW, other convicted murderers on the cover include Drew Peterson and Scott Peterson.  The articles are grouped by categories of killers/killings, e.g. ‘crimes of passion’, pre-meditated, etc.

Posted by all4justice on 03/18/15 at 04:12 PM | #

DavidB - Thank you, I hadn’t seen the entire clip before.  God, this is painful to watch.

They spend the first several minutes arguing about a photo of Sollecito getting into a Ferrari. 

For some more light-humour, here’s Bill Maher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5n8AUHNHg

18:15 - new excuse about the phones, Amanda turned hers off after receiving Patrick’s texts, but he didn’t.  He says that house has very thick walls, and unless you are by a window, so signal.

Funny, since he doesn’t have a history of the phone being shut off, maybe it was always by a window.

19:30 - new excuse about the phone, he didn’t shut it off, he just ‘‘got rid of it’‘, whatever that means.

Dr. Bruzzone actually could have made a decent argument, but she keeps getting interrupted.

24:00 - Sollecito is pulling a Knox (arguing about ‘‘non-existant’’ evidence and standards rather than just saying he didn’t do it.

27:20 - Sollecito claims that Cassation had come down hard on ‘‘evidence prcedures’‘.  I think he has the courts mixed up.

28:40 - Sollecito’s ‘‘advocate’‘, Victorio Feltri, claims the police bungled the case.  Big shocker.

30:30 - Unf***ing believable, Victori Feltri says he is the true victim, but he can’t remember Meredith’s name.

30:53 - Feltri later clarifies there are 3 victims: Meredith, Amanda, Raffaele.

36:00 - Sollecito asking why would I do it?  Instead of stating he didn’t.

36:20 - Feltri pulls a ‘‘Carlo Vedova’’ saying there has to be a motive.

It is mostly just Feltri and Sollecito trying to fillibuster everything.  No real info shared here.

Okay, going to bed.  I’d rather slit my wrists than finishing watching it.  It is THAT bad.

Posted by Chimera on 03/19/15 at 12:37 AM | #

Odysseus, agreed.

Chimera,
Thank you for the Maher clip; v good!
The other video is indeed very unpleasant to watch. True also about Feltri; he made shameful comments.
You made the right decision!

Posted by DavidB on 03/19/15 at 06:12 AM | #

Nina Burleigh has confirmed her reputation for being a useless journalist with this piece of trash:

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/03/27/will-amanda-knox-be-dragged-back-italy-murder-case-314970.html

Posted by The Machine on 03/19/15 at 09:27 AM | #

Who the hell is Genny Ballerini?

Posted by mojo on 03/19/15 at 12:54 PM | #

Hi Mojo,

She’s one of the lay judges. I smell a rat:

“Crucially the only person definitively convicted of the murder had not implicated the pair. He has given three different accounts of the murder and never said that Knox and Sollecito were with him, she pointed out.”

Guede categorically stated in court that Knox and Sollecito killed Meredith.

Posted by The Machine on 03/19/15 at 12:57 PM | #

I suspect Nina Burleigh’s source from the US Department of State is Michael Scadron. He’s one of the FOA lunatics.

Posted by The Machine on 03/19/15 at 01:01 PM | #

Nina Burleigh….... Well that just goes to prove that copy by the pound will lose your reading audience in about 30 seconds. She’s only preaching to the choir anyway so I doubt if she will get any converts who are not committed or should be.Speaking of which I see that George Henshaw from Cambridge UK has joined the fray. You may remember George who advocated and was convinced that Jodi Arias was innocent.

The comments in the previous Knox websites are notable because the pro Knox crowd is getting smaller and you can count them on almost one hand. It is obvious also that they interchange identities. For example Bourgeoisviews drops out of sight to be replaced with Hinkertom or Fredly (Better known as Brian Corvello) All employed by groundreport and therefore paid by the Knox PR organization who pay groundreport therefore these people who scream innocent are direct recipients of payment by proxy. Lovely people who have a vested interest just like Bruce Fischer, Steve and Michelle Moore, Nina Burleigh and the usual collection of parasites.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 03/19/15 at 01:17 PM | #

yes, the Machine, something definitely smells about this…why now? what’s her game?

Posted by mojo on 03/19/15 at 02:02 PM | #

Our Nina Burleigh collection is here: http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C823/

There’s a major psychological profile of her by a real expert due out soon. Its a humdinger and really explains why she has chained herself to Knox.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/19/15 at 02:47 PM | #

Hi Mojo,

Sollecito’s people must have contacted all the lay jurors to see whether any of them had any doubts. She doesn’t sound the sharpest tool in the box. There have been countless cases where people have killed with little or no motive. It’s interesting to note that no-one raises the issue of motive when it comes to the black man.

Something doesn’t add up about Nina Burleigh’s claims about the US Department of State. Her source didn’t say that Amanda Knox wouldn’t be extradited. Newsweek have deliberately twisted his words to give the impression that they did. If the FOA were so confident that Knox won’t be extradited, why are they bothering tweeting every Tom, Dick and Harry like there’s no tomorrow.

Posted by The Machine on 03/19/15 at 03:13 PM | #

One juror does not an acquittal make unless you watch the movie 12 Angry Men, but that has never happened in real life. It brings to mind though juror number 17 in the Jodi Arias thing who basically spared Arias the death penalty, but again in order for the death penalty in the US to go forward it takes complete agreement. Genny Ballerini, the juror in question here had doubts. So what? That is what juries do and in this case makes no difference to the final outcome. I have gone from being cautiously optimistic concerning extradition to being concerned that the FOA will pull some stunt or other, but rather than screaming and trying to sway public opinion a la Nina Burleigh they have nothing left. Also In my view, Karen Pruett submitting to the State Department the petition before they had even a smattering of signatures smacks of desperation. In other words she did that in order to show that she had at least tried her level best. Of course Knox herself has nothing to do with this. In fact this ‘cause cerebra’ has taken on a life of its own and Knox herself only counts as a figure head with no actual meaning whatever.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 03/19/15 at 04:25 PM | #


Make a comment

If you are reading this please log in to post a comment.

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Rare Case Where Extradition To Italy Was Refused Has Been Reversed By Brazil

Or to previous entry Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided