Amanda Knox found guilty for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy #15

[TorisMom003]

So in reading the Hellman report, it was decided that to many assumptions had been made and to much evidence had been ignored? Yet in the Massei report, the same is true. So how is it that the Massei report is thought to be accurate when it also has many assumptions made and evidence ignored?

 

[otto]

So in reading the Hellman report, it was decided that to many assumptions had been made and to much evidence had been ignored? Yet in the Massei report, the same is true. So how is it that the Massei report is thought to be accurate when it also has many assumptions made and evidence ignored?

Hellman's decision was annulled, in part, because it was illogical, the reasoning was incorrect, and the judge viewed each piece of evidence in isolation rather than as a totality. The same is not true of the trial Judge. Evidence was not ignored, the reasoning was not illogical, the evidence was viewed as a totality, and his decision was not annulled.

The defense requested that some evidence be re-evaluated and it was. One point was that they wanted a new set of experts to evaluate the DNA evidence. Conti & Vecchioti stated that there was no DNA on the knife, which was a mistake. They were wrong. It was obvious that they were either unaware of the most up to date DNA testing methods, or they chose not use the latest tools available to them. From Hampikian, we know that he claims to have been instrumental in the acquittal, yet his input is a "state secret". He was not recognized by the court as an expert and should not have had a role in influencing the report. There is something very irregular between Hampikian's statements and how the court expects experts to conduct themselves.

 

[ShadyLady]

But in her recent interview(GMA) admitted she did not feel bad about her lack of sensitivity. (Paraphrasing).

Shades of Jodi Arias...imo

 

[Vinny]

So if the supreme court confirms the verdict they still get to appeal one more time? Still trying to wrap my head around this whole process. I hope this doesn't drag out too long.

:jail::jail::jail:

 

[SMK]

Hellman's decision was annulled, in part, because it was illogical, the reasoning was incorrect, and the judge viewed each piece of evidence in isolation rather than as a totality. The same is not true of the trial Judge. Evidence was not ignored, the reasoning was not illogical, the evidence was viewed as a totality, and his decision was not annulled.

The defense requested that some evidence be re-evaluated and it was. One point was that they wanted a new set of experts to evaluate the DNA evidence. Conti & Vecchioti stated that there was no DNA on the knife, which was a mistake. They were wrong. It was obvious that they were either unaware of the most up to date DNA testing methods, or they chose not use the latest tools available to them. From Hampikian, we know that he claims to have been instrumental in the acquittal, yet his input is a "state secret". He was not recognized by the court as an expert and should not have had a role in influencing the report. There is something very irregular between Hampikian's statements and how the court expects experts to conduct themselves.

And to add - expanding on all the facts Otto has listed, and adding the words of Galati - it was put before the Court of Cassation to examine and find illogical and dismissive precisely these errors in the reasoning of Hellman:

from Dr. Galati's closing arguments to the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation: His summation on p 94:

"It is submitted, therefore, because the most Excellent Court of Cassation, in accepting the current appeal, will desire to quash the decision of the Court of Appeal of Perugia, No 4 of 2011, handed down on October 3, 2011 and deposited on December 15, 2011, in the proceeding with the ordering of a new determination under Article 623(c) of the Criminal Procedure Code. "

_and from concluding note p 127:
__________________________________________________________________
"The Court of Cassation’s function is limited to examining the coherence of the lower court’s web of reasoning, without going into whether the resulting conclusions line up with the adduced and accepted evidence, or how plausible those conclusions are.

Cassation’s role is to determine whether the judges have examined all the elements at their disposal, and whether in interpreting the evidence they have precisely applied the rules of logic, maxims of common experience, and legal criteria for evaluating evidence, in such a way as to allow a rational justification of the conclusions reached in preference to other conclusions. For the purposes of Article 606(e), because it inevitably invades the domain reserved for the lower court’s appreciation and assessment, it must be shown that the judgment is manifestly lacking in reasoning and/or logic and not merely that it instead provides a different reconstruction of events, perhaps on some alternative logic."

 

[ShadyLady]

Why would RS have said in his first interview with police that Knox had left?

And normally dirty Knox helped bleach RS's place, why?

I don't see Rudy cleaning up apartment and then leaving his poop. I think Knox cleaned up. Her lamp, and lying about showering and drying hair. Staged break-ins are her past MO.

And I hope RS comes clean when he realizes Knox will not marry him and give him US citizenship which he has requested.

 

[otto]

So if the supreme court confirms the verdict they still get to appeal one more time? Still trying to wrap my head around this whole process. I hope this doesn't drag out too long.

:jail::jail::jail:

No. The Judge will produce a trial summary report in the next 90 days. The defense will then have 45 days to appeal. The prosecution may respond to those appeals. That will be presented to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will make a decision:

• to accept the appeal and return the case to the Appeals level, or
• that the appeals are unfounded, and confirm the verdict, and
• that the sentence should be reduced/increased.

If there are no errors in logic and reasoning, the appeal will most likely be denied and the verdict will be confirmed. Then it's written in stone. That is most likely when the extradition process will begin.

Double jeopardy is not an issue as Knox is not being tried in Italy after being tried in the US. Italy has to produce a brief statement of facts of the case, relevant laws, a description of the punishment and the statute of liminations. On that basis, a decision will be made. I see no reason why the US would not recognize a murder conviction in a country where there are extradition treaties.

That's my understanding. Guede's sentence was written in stone after the appeals were denied, but his sentence was reduced from 30 years to 25 years to match that of Knox and Sollecito. Knox's slander conviction was confirmed by the Supreme Court, but the sentence was extended by this appeal court after Lumumba successfully appealed to the court to increase the sentence on the basis that she accused him of murder for the purpose of distracting the investigation. I believe that if Knox had fulfilled her sentence and paid Lumumba the €22,000 his request would have been denied.

 

[Vinny]

No. The Judge will produce a trial summary report in the next 90 days. The defense will then have 45 days to appeal. The prosecution may respond to those appeals. That will be presented to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will make a decision to:

• accept the appeal and return the case to the Appeals level, or
• that the appeals are unfounded, and confirm the verdict, or
• that the sentence should be reduced/increased.

If there are no errors in logic and reasoning, the appeal will most likely be denied and the verdict will be confirmed. Then it's written in stone. That is most likely when the extradition process will begin.

Double jeopardy is not an issue as Knox is not being tried in Italy after being tried in the US. Italy has to produce a brief statement of facts of the case, relevant laws, a description of the punishment and the statute of liminations. On that basis, a decision will be made. I see no reason why the US would not recognize a murder conviction in a country where there are extradition treaties.

Thanks, let's hope this process moves quickly.

 

[Jessica2012]

Hellman's decision was annulled, in part, because it was illogical, the reasoning was incorrect, and the judge viewed each piece of evidence in isolation rather than as a totality. The same is not true of the trial Judge. Evidence was not ignored, the reasoning was not illogical, the evidence was viewed as a totality, and his decision was not annulled.

The defense requested that some evidence be re-evaluated and it was. One point was that they wanted a new set of experts to evaluate the DNA evidence. Conti & Vecchioti stated that there was no DNA on the knife, which was a mistake. They were wrong. It was obvious that they were either unaware of the most up to date DNA testing methods, or they chose not use the latest tools available to them. From Hampikian, we know that he claims to have been instrumental in the acquittal, yet his input is a "state secret". He was not recognized by the court as an expert and should not have had a role in influencing the report. There is something very irregular between Hampikian's statements and how the court expects experts to conduct themselves.

Also many things were left out during the annulled appeal trial that jurors never saw. For example, prosecution showed reenactments during the first trial in a closed courtroom. They were convicted in that trial but it was not allowed during the annulled appeal trial.

 

[otto]

Thanks, let's hope this process moves quickly.

There's various speculation about the timeline. Some believe that the Judge's report will be submitted before the 90 day time limit. With the appeals, the defense will delay until day 45 to prevent the prosecution from having time to respond appropriately to the appeal. The Supreme Court may bump this case up the list to put an end to it.

Either way, whether it's 6 months or 18 months, as soon as an extradition request is made, Knox has to be rounded up and put into the prison that is about 5 miles from her home. She will have to remain there until she has exhausted her extradition fight ... and that will be an eye opener for someone that is only familiar with a Rehabilition Prison rather than a Punitivie Prison.

 

[SMK]

No. The Judge will produce a trial summary report in the next 90 days. The defense will then have 45 days to appeal. The prosecution may respond to those appeals. That will be presented to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will make a decision:

• to accept the appeal and return the case to the Appeals level, or
• that the appeals are unfounded, and confirm the verdict, and
• that the sentence should be reduced/increased.

If there are no errors in logic and reasoning, the appeal will most likely be denied and the verdict will be confirmed. Then it's written in stone. That is most likely when the extradition process will begin.

BBM/Snipped <> -Otto,

How likely do you think it is that Nencini allowed errors to stand (within the trial or the deliberations)--- or rather, how likely do you believe the SCC will find the presence of these?

 

[otto]

Also many things were left out of the annulled appeal trial that jurors never saw. For example, prosecution showed reenactments during the first trial in a closed courtroom. They were convicted in this that trial but it was not allowed during the annulled appeal trial.

I remember that. The defense had a long list of points that they wanted to re-litigate, but the majority were refused. I've looked for the related article but so far no luck. I'm curious about what was on that list.

Many people are confused by the appeal process in Italy. It is described as a new trial, as that is how an appeal is handled in the US. In Italy, there is no new trial, but instead only points that could be viewed as needing further consideration are considered during the appeal ... so the majority of the content of the original trial is excluded from the appeal.

 

[Queen_City]

Amanda had staged break-ins prior to Nov. 1, 2007?

 

[Jacie Estes]

It is Steve Moore's theory.
Perhaps it has always been the Friends of Amanda theory.


Interview with Steve Moore regarding theory of crime:

http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/31/amanda-knox-i-will-never-go-willingly-back-to-italy/

(the theory is that it's a huge conspiracy theory involving everyone from police officers to the Supreme Court)

Every one is out to get AK? Paranoia is not a good thing, especially if you are defending yourself in a murder trial.

 

[otto]

BBM/Snipped <> -Otto,

How likely do you think it is that Nencini allowed errors to stand (within the trial or the deliberations)--- or rather, how likely do you believe the SCC will find the presence of these?

Nencini was very strict in the courtroom, so I suspect that he will be very strict in terms of the logic (no errors). For example, Bongiorno attempted to discuss the first statement that was signed by Knox, and to complain about the interpreter. The judge shut her down and said that although he would like to discuss those points, they were not open for discussion because that statement was excluded from the murder trial.

From the statement made by Nencini in the last couple of days, it sounds like the jury looked at Knox and Sollecito as having nothing better to do after 8:15PM on Nov 1, so they got more stoned and decided to get into some post-Halloween mischief ... which ended in tragedy.

 

[ShadyLady]

Amanda had staged break-ins prior to Nov. 1, 2007?

quote:

Amanda Knox has admitted on her personal blog for the first time that she had previously been involved in a ‘staged robbery’ during her time at the University of Washington. She admitted that the hazing prank, played on her flat-mates at the University of Washington, involved messing up the flat and hiding things to make it appear as if items had been stolen. Knox used "mutual friends" of her other housemates to help fake the burglary in her own premises. She acknowledges that it caused "distress" to her housemates and she and her accomplices had to apologise for the act. She does not disclose, however, what exactly happened or the full role of the "mutual friends".

link:http://truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/amanda-knox-admits-staging-burglary.html

 

[otto]

Amanda had staged break-ins prior to Nov. 1, 2007?

April 1, 2007, Knox encouraged some friends to play a prank on a roommate where they staged a burglary. The original information, from 2007, is that they wore masks and it ended with a very upset roommate. From Knox in a recent comment on her blog, they didn't wear masks and afterwards it was okay.

 

[otto]

Every one is out to get AK? Paranoia is not a good thing, especially if you are defending yourself in a murder trial.

This is a statement from Steve Moore, retired FBI agent, who is a long standing Friend of Amanda (along with Judge Heavey; Seattle, and Anne Bremner). Moore also contributed to the recent 80 page document that was compiled by Wright and which was released last Tuesday. Moore and his wife are outspoken supporters of Knox and it is Steve Moore's position that there is a conspiracy at every level of the Italian justice system, from the street police to the Supreme Court, to convict Knox and Sollecito because Guede is a police informant that committed murder. Apparently the prosecution of Knox/Sollecito is to cover up the fact that Guede is a police informant.

It's enlightening to hear the very strange theories from the Knox is Innocent perspective.

 

[ShadyLady]

April 1, 2007, Knox encouraged some friends to play a prank on a roommate where they staged a burglary. The original information, from 2007, is that they wore masks and it ended with a very upset roommate. From Knox in a recent comment on her blog, they didn't wear masks and afterwards it was okay.

And from same link, I guess it OK for the PR Machine to lie if it helps Knox:

"Rumours of the hazing prank have been around for years, after a former acquaintance of Knox’s let the story slip, just a month after her arrest. On being pressed for details, the informant clammed up, and the incident has subsequently been vociferously denied by members of Knox’s family and her supporters. "

 

[otto]

The real evidence in the case:

"The verdict handed down yesterday at the new appeal trial for Amanda Knox and her former Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, accused of the murder of British citizen Meredith Kercher in Italy in November 2007, may come as a surprise to those whose view of the case has been affected by an international media blitz based on the oft-repeated claim &#8220;There is no evidence&#8221;. Many believe that Rudy Guede, convicted in October 2008 for participating in the murder, acted alone."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...gainst-amanda-knox-theres-plenty-9099649.html