Monday, November 25, 2013

Appeal Session #4: Today Lead Prosecutor Alessandro Crini Summarises The Prosecution’s Case

Posted by Our Main Posters


This is the report on the first day of Prosecutor Crnini summarizing the entire case.

This was not attempted at such length at the 2011 Hellman appeal and that panel of judges was perhaps not ever fully in the picture. The second day of the presentation is reported on here. 

Real-Time Reporting, Bottom-Up

5. Good reporting on the court today

Andrea Vogt has posted an objective report here and Barbie Nadeau an objective report here.  We will post excerpts from both and other sources after the appeal session on Tuesday is done.

5. Warning about AP’s Colleen Barry

The Associated Press’s Colleen Barry is once again filing highly biased reports from the court. This is an appeal by Knox and Sollecito AGAINST a guilty verdict (by Judge Massei) and not an appeal by the prosecution to “reinstate” a guilty verdict. Get a grip.

4. Final post from the court today

It is 5:30 pm in Italy. Judge Nencini has declared today’s session at an end and he has allowed the prosecution to resume its presentation tomorrow. Prosecutor Crini has about 1/3 of his presentation on the evidence still to come.

3. Tweets from main poster Yummi

Yummi has warned us that the wireless internet bandwidth inside and just outside the courtroom gets overloaded late in the day as the reporters get busy on their reports.  Yummi does have a way around this but it involves leaving the courtroom when key arguments might be made and walking some distance away. So there might be some slight delays.

[More pending; Dr Crini has alerted that his presentation will be in 16 chapters]

51. [Judge] Nencini suggests to interrupt and go on tomorrow with following prosecution’s points. New schedule.

50. Chapter 11. is DNA. Crini says we may have evidence enough by now anyway

49. Crini censures Hellmann-Zanetti’s reasoning about calunnia (why not indicate the real culprit?). Says H-Z committed ‘physical violence’ on trial file

48. Knox’s calunnia is a strategy protracted over time says Crini

47. Dreamlike component in Knox’s statement, fish blood, are devices needed to surround a calunnia strategy

46. Knox needed to put some additional content into the ‘calunnia’, says Crini, or wouldn’t be believed, so she puts in pieces of truth

45. Knox spoke about a scream an a sexual violence before anyone knew. Sollecito said nothing was stolen before they knew.

44. Points out Sollecito says Romanelli’s door was wide open; Knox doesn’t notice theft. Crini highlights the ‘combination’ of inconsistencies

43. Knox thinks locked door is normal; does not flush toilet when finds feces; does not notice blood before having a shower; thinks blood is ok

42. Notes Knox’s statements are inconsistent and ommisive before her interrogation.

41. Crini speaks about Knox’s declarations. Interested in the timings. Says too much was repeated to be coerced.

40. Crini speaks about chapter 9, the statements of Sollecito. His call to her sister. His alert was late but even so preceded the postals arrive

39. Bathmat print and luminol prints were chapter 7. of Crini’s argument; 8. is the staging of theft.

38. The most significant stain may be the one in Romanelli’s room, says Crini.

37. Speaking of a female’s print left in luminol, Crini sounds outraged, saying other substances is vague unsubstantiated conjecture [eg it was blood not bleach]

36. Guede’s sentencing was not well calibrated says Crini. But a Guede alone scenario is not tenable

35. Does it make sense for Guede to leave there the evidence of (putative) theft, and clean footprints?

34. The unitary sense made by elements like the bloody print, is a cleanup. Considers the lone-perp scenario: inconsistent

33. Crini: starts talking about the isolated bloody print; calls it a ‘talking element’. Why is that print alone?

32. Suspects are only ones with a ‘logistic’ capability and an interest to ‘clean’ the murder scene. They aimed at ‘diminishing’ the evidence mass

31. Knox’s lamp was the only light in her room.

30. Crini: the perp(s) organized a rather complex plan to clean up and ‘sidetrack’ at the murder scene.

29. Still to be determined if calunnia was “occasional” due to pressure, or “aggravated” [sidetracking]; Crini saya a ‘depistaggio reale’ (sidetracking) occurred

28. Crini: suspects’ statements are extremely interesting: RS’s statements; AK’s e-mail, internet statements, [Knox’s] memoriale

27. Crini: a most fertile chapter of analysis is the ‘post-factum’ actions and behaviors of defendants

26. Crini has unfolded five chapters. Says he has a total of sixteen

25. Quintavalle, details of his testimony and woman’s description are exceptional indicators of accuracy.

34. Crini: it is unlikely that Quintavalle got it wrong. Because of contextual elements.

23. It is incorrect to dismiss a witness a priori because late. But for reasons totally different. Sometimes late is symptom of reliability.

22. Wants to deal with the issue of the fact that he came forward late, urged by an acquaintance

21. Crini: fifth argument is Quintavalle. He says he is sure about his testimony. Is a different kind of witness

20. Crini accepts both alternatives on time of death, after 23.15 or before 22.30 (but seems to prefer the earlier one)

19. Crini: Do not overestimate importance of timings that are not anchored accurately or cannot be proven

18. Crini: timeline is marginal to the case. All unproven timings to be taken cautiously.

17. Crini starts fourth theme: timings. Says they are very vague, except the tow truck

16. Crini: Curatolo is no ‘super-witness’, but can contribute to helping the court to draw their scenario

15. Curatolo saw a couple discussing and this memory is very specific, peculiar

14. Curatolo did not confuse night with Halloween, because it was big party in piazza the previous night, and because it did not rain

13. Crini: the court saw Aviello, shows what top [level] of unreliability is; the SC suspected so unreliable that calunnia elements had to be assessed

12. Crini: many trials could not exist if drug addicted testimonies were dismissed

11. Crini: the H-Z court assessed Curatolo a priori based on him as a person, stemming from questions of the court itself

10. Crini about Curatolo, describes Piazza Grimana; he was an habitual presence of the piazza, proven reliable in other cases

9. Crini: computer records and alibi point to Sollecito being not at home but on murder scene

8. Crini cites the log files of Fastweb: no internet activity, only automatic connections.

7. Crini: failure of computer alibi is evidence against, not just lack of confirmation.

6. Nencini notes prosecution did not ask to interrogate Sollecito. Crini cites D’Ambrosio’s computer expert report. No interaction before 5am

5. Sollecito gave computer alibi days later, and words his statement in the singular form.

4. Crini: first theme he deals with is presence of crime scene; alibi, if it’s false it is evidence no matter why false (cite from Guede trial)

3. Crini attacks the method of logic reasoning of annulled appeal: parceling out evidence, parrots aspects of civil procedure

2. Crini: Supreme Court censure was against the foundations of appeal , all parts not just some errors; appeal was ‘razed to ground’.

1. Crini: this appeal is unusual, not because of the case but for the course followed. Usually appeals are narrow, this SC annulment is not.

2. Tweets by Andrea Vogt

3. At Crini’s side in amandaknox appeal today is veteran Florentine prosecutor Tindari Baglione. Before this, he was in Cassazione.

2. Prosecutor Crini in Florence: don’t repeat error of Perugia appeal. Consider evidence wholly, including Curatolo.

1. Will prosecutors ask life sentences in amandaknox appeal today? Will Sollecito’s presence in court benefit him? Verdict January 10.

1. Prosecution Begins

This is the prosecution’s day. Sollecito is reported as being in court but low-key.

Various reporting notes the significant presence of Dr Tindari Baglione, formerly with the Supreme Court, about whom we posted on in September as follows:

The new Prosecutor General of Tuscany (Florence’s region) Dr Tindari Baglione, the chief prosecutor of Tuscany’s appeal court, is selecting the prosecutors for the appeal. He arrived in Florence in May of this year. He is said to be formidably unbending. He recently imposed tough sentences on 27 people for the environmental damage caused by illegal work in Mugello on the high speed rail link between Florence and Bologna.


Aside from my views on the case, I am just thrilled to see this play by play disposition of the inquisitorial process. Given my druthers, and when protected by constitutional guarantees (HAH!) I still prefer English Common Law.

But, the intellect and humanity displayed by the inquisitorial process, I am left with a deep appreciation of the somewhat lengthy but searching for the truth, and not convictions, Italian legal process.

Posted by Ergon on 11/25/13 at 04:37 PM | #

Prosecutor Crini repeatedly takes Sherlock Holmes’s “dog that didnt bark in the night” stance (there was no bark - absence of evidence - because the murderer was the dog’s friend):

Why did Sollecito’s alibis include only himself, why was Knox’s lamp not in her own room, why would late-appearing witnesses lie, why was there only the one bloody footprint in the bathroom and none leading there, why was there no activity on Sollecito’s PC when he claimed?

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/25/13 at 04:37 PM | #

I appreciate the Italian approach very much.

A very patient, consistent, fact-by-fact approach which eventually brings us to a completed jigsaw puzzle picture.

Posted by thundering on 11/25/13 at 04:51 PM | #

More terrible, terrible Associated Press reporting. We have just tweeted about this wrong report:  “Amanda Knox trial: Prosecutor wants to reinstate guilty verdict”

#amandaknox @AP Reporting AGAIN wrong, this is NOT about reinstatement of guilty verdict but an appeal by AK & RS AGAINST guilty verdict

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/25/13 at 05:23 PM | #

Dr Crini is repeatedly referring to the rearrangement of the crime scene as a calunnia (obstruction of justice).

Knox was already sentenced to three years for one calunnia crime (framing of Patrick) and may face other calunnia charges for false accusations of crimes in her dishonest book.

Spezi, Sforza, Knox’s parents, and Sollecitos family already face calunnia charges.

Soon maybe also Preston, Heavey, Sforza, Fischer, the two Moore, Ted Simon, the book publishers, and some others.

With mafia an eager fellow traveler, that is quite a crime wave… Never hurts to bone up on Italian law and actually understand the case.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/25/13 at 06:09 PM | #

But how would they manage all those prosecutions of people in the USA?

Posted by thundering on 11/25/13 at 06:15 PM | #

Many of the points have been discussed here in detail before. They are presenting a very systematic version in a organized fashion.

Dr Crini is putting out all the individual pieces of the jigsaw puzzle face up for the world to see.

Bad day for the FoA army. The day of the defense will be sometime in the next month but they have to work overtime!

How much of the 2M is still left?

I am here just for the justice!

Posted by chami on 11/25/13 at 06:34 PM | #

Thank you, Yummi, for your excellent tweeting from the court!!

Posted by thundering on 11/25/13 at 06:38 PM | #

Thanks Yummi!

I think Dr Crini is reading TJMK! Thanks for the updates and see you tomorrow again.

Posted by chami on 11/25/13 at 06:45 PM | #

Well done Yummi. This is intense. I hope you brought an overnight bag.

Sorry, I have to going offline for 6 hours. It wont affect comments, just post updates. Looking forward to any new tips.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/25/13 at 06:52 PM | #

thanks Yummi! great job.

Posted by mojo on 11/25/13 at 07:19 PM | #

Crini is intelligent and powerful. He’s exploding the case wide open, awesome. To hear Prosecutor Crini cancelling the Knox propaganda, what a rush.

The bloody female footprint Knox’s size was so casually dismissed, a Luminol footprint which alone fries Amanda. “I can’t lie, I was there”, she whispered to her parents. And her own lamp gone from her bedroom which she pretended not to notice after a theft. Signs of a cynical liar.

Crini is blasting her on all fronts, double dishing on the calunnia, too. Thank you Yummi for reports of actual justice coming into this world.

Posted by Hopeful on 11/25/13 at 07:39 PM | #

It’s very odd to me that someone who is provisionally guilty, like Sollecito, should be allowed to make comments outside the courtroom during breaks. For example: “After all of this time, I just continue to confront a situation of repeated accusations that have no foundation in reality or likelihood.”

They clearly do things differently in Italy and maybe they do them better (we shall see). Still it’s strange that he’s even allowed outside the court during his defence appeal let alone free to spout vacuous drivel to the waiting media like the international movie star he thinks he is.Why on earth couldn’t he be thrown into a dark holding cell somewhere in the building (preferably with nothing but a mirror, a comb and a knife - the latter in case he felt like doing the decent thing)?

Posted by Odysseus on 11/25/13 at 08:40 PM | #

Perhaps because of the calunnia aspect perhaps their sentences will be extended. however I’m not going to hold my breath. Of course, and to quote Winston Churchill “This is not the end, nor is this the beginning. But rather the end of the beginning.” I think that’s right. In any event after December or perhaps January of next year. It will of course go on and on. Incidentally I went to read the Pacific North West News item as Peter mentioned. The comments are the usual nonsense contributed by spoon fed acolytes who are only rabbit opinion they have been told about.
As to Sollecito, well perhaps in Italy they believe that giving enough people rope they will hang themselves. We can only hope. The FOA seems to be very quiet these days. Holding their collective breath no doubt.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 11/25/13 at 08:56 PM | #

Barbie Nadeau is boldly reporting on Prosecutor Crini’s masterful presentation of the case. She uses “Guilty” in her headline. Go, Dr. Crini…

Crini puts the appropriate weight on Curatolo’s testimony, giving him credence but allowing for some inaccuracies. Crini says not to strain the timings beyond what human fallibility allows (that’s my paraphrase of how Crini says not to be a slave to any times that aren’t anchored in solid facts).

He repudiates the lies Knox said about Filomena’s door being closed. He points out that it was Raffaele who said Filomena’s door was wide open. Knox didn’t want to admit the door was open where she could see a shattered window and clothes dumped out onto floor, because she and Raf had done that themselves. They did it for the purposes Crini describes: to sidetrack the police and obstruct justice. He also is very very concerned about the mixed DNA of both Knox and Mez on one spot on Filomena’s floor. He is not buying Knox’s innocent act nor Raffaele’s. He does not underestimate their deviousness, wise move.

Tomorrow Maresca will speak for the Kercher family, but first Crini will start the day by concluding his important chapters. It seems he gave the jurors so much meaty evidence that Judge Nencini elected to give them more time to process it, and more time for Crini to continue his ascent up the Mt. Everest of evidence tomorrow.

Raffaele gave a crazy “courthouse steps” media interview lamenting the groundless persecution of his noble self as his lawyer Bongiorno looked on at him askance. No doubt Amanda is trembling in some cubbyhole in Seattle thinking, “My kingdom for another Hellmann, this is worse than I expected. I’ll never pass finals now, where’s the Adderall? Marriott, I want a refund. Ted Simon get busy. Mom, any TV engagements, we need to get out in front of this, can anybody get Raf out of Italy like the plane they sent for me? His dad might pay. Someone call Laura my drug mule cellmate in South America, I need a fix or her new address. Mad, feed the cats.”

Posted by Hopeful on 11/25/13 at 10:18 PM | #

Thank you Yummi, very interesting!

Posted by Terry on 11/26/13 at 02:17 AM | #

Excerpt from latest Florence court update by journalist Andrea Vogt,

” Razed to the ground. Faulty logic. Conjecture. Implausible. A combination of inconsistencies. Large spectrum censorship of the facts. These were just a few of the scathing adjectives used by a Florence prosecutor to describe the acquittal decision in the first appeals trial that freed Amanda Knox in 2011.”

Posted by True North on 11/26/13 at 02:54 AM | #

Thank you to Yummi : much appreciated.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 11/26/13 at 10:09 AM | #

It was good to see how Crini spent the entire day yesterday on the abundant evidence of AK and RS’s involvement from outside Meredith’s locked bedroom.

For far too long the Defences have been isolating out the evidence from within the room and ignoring everything else.

Yesterday it was picked over and brought back into the clear light of day for all to see.

Great stuff.

Posted by thundering on 11/26/13 at 01:29 PM | #

“The murder is contextual, there is no premeditation.”??
I wonder if this is not a blind alley where you can be caught out. It does seem strange that the perpetrators kept a kitchen knife about their person. Any other knife, perhaps, given Sollecito’s particular facinations, but the kitchen knife? carried for what purpose? If there had been premeditation of a sort, to frighten and to threaten, to enforce sexual assault, then yes, there is reason and purpose that can be imagined behind its addition to their day to day paraphenalia. But to carry it without any provocation, any thought for its use, why take it from the house? No! I don’t think so. And then to return the same knife to the drawer it came from,admittedly after cleaning with bleach, on the assumption that the house would never be searched for a murder weapon? since they were so far above suspicion? does stretch credulity. If you are to argue there was no premeditation and no sexual motivation in preplanning I think you are going down a blind alley from which it is difficult to escape while keeping credibility.
It is so vital that a guilty verdict is retained that I might be jumping at shadows, if so please someone put my mind at ease. I have mentioned the murder weapon being hidden in the drawer before and received an adequate answer- though speculative, but I am still unsure.

Meredith Susanna Cara Kercher murdered, because Amanda Knox felt persecuted,
by the idea that Meredith ever existed, and she obsessed about her obdurate self assurance. Meredith was a victim of catathymic homicide. there were no warning signs, but a dam for anger and frustration burst asunder as layers of stabilising delusion gave way and reality supervened. The anxious aegis of hearts malignantly driven -into the boundless darkness of jealous envy—because Knox infers more, she is willing to see less of what was the essential Meredith. The intent is evident it emerged slowly, imperceptibly over days, a projected fantasy personality, a tension filled product of emotional transference patterned by past experiences verging on obsession where Knox was the victim, her judgment numbly distorted by the inferred frame of reference in the dark nights of the soul when the ice weasels come.

Posted by Macthomas on 11/28/13 at 01:25 AM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Appeal Session #5: Prosecutor Alessandro Crini Concludes, Proposes 30 Years For AK And 26 For RS

Or to previous entry Differences Between Micheli, Massei, Hellmann and Nencini Courts Pointing To Almost Certain Outcome