Where the letter is wrong is where it says that ILE broke Italian law. It didn't. Sure, they violated the EU human rights charter to shreds, but that's nothing new to Italy. As for Italian law itself, ILE pulled the same sleazy game played by LEAs that have jumped the shark all over the world - they made sure to follow the letter of the law even as they violated the intent of it.
Examples: The less than truthful press releases/leaks etc: AK & RS were only suspects at that point. ILE carefully held back from charging them until the last minute, which allowed for them to pull all sorts of shenanigans legally. This is one of many reasons why the EU human rights charter and that of the UN prohibit long detentions without charges. Of course, the US is not exactly in a good position to be pointing this out after the GITMO mess.
The translator: It is standard practice when questioning foreign suspects to attain a translator from the person's embassy. Officially, AK was questioned as a witness that night (which also weasels out of the recording laws), and so was not entitled to any more than a police translator. Legally speaking, it matters not that the testimony about the "firm but friendly questioning" is blatant, smug testi-lying - the courts in any country rarely if ever rebuke such ridiculous assertions. And yes, guilters, that was most definitely a bald-faced lie, along the lines of "he assaulted my hand with his face!" - an 'interview' involving 30 officers on overtime, that doesn't start until late at night is an interrogation, no doubt about it. If you question that assertion, go consult with any LEO you wish, and they will agree (and they will most likely also agree that fudging declaration of Suspects is a common way to work around laws intended to protect the rights of the accused - thus the advent of the 'person of interest').
The above cheat also covers not getting her access to a lawyer.
I'm short on time and patience at the moment, so I can't recall the rest of the things called 'illegal by Italian law', but I do know that when I first went through the letter, I found similar circumstances - no Italian laws were violated in application, which is all that really matters in the end (just ask the many prisoners that have fallen prey to such tactics in the US, UK and most everywhere else - sure, the courts know that it's dirty, but won't do anything about it because it's strangely enough usually not something that happens out of malignant intent - it's more just a matter of getting the job done in the LEA's viewpoint).
@DGFred - sorry I'm late on that play by play, I'm not avoiding it, just super busy. I'll get to it when I can. Thanks for your patience.
ETA - Please note that while this may have sounded anti-cop, I am anything but. I am a huge supporter of LE and Prosecutors, as long as they are acting in good faith, as the majority do. Alas, I am also well aware of the minority of the same that treat the laws and human rights as if they were the rules to a game of tag, and that the laws that protect the good LEOs and Prosecutors unfortunately make if very difficult to do anything about the bad ones. Thus as a realist, I make mention of things that other LE supporters are very sensitive about. My apologies if anyone takes offense.
.....:slap: surely you must see that there is at least some strange coincidence at work regarding Mignini being on the case? Or am I viewing the whole thing too much as literature...... ?? :waitasec: So to you, it would have been open and shut without Mignini? ........:razz:
eace::skip:
and 2. just realized that while I was bored to tears and posting, clients were emailing me to get cracking on their work
