Page 475 of 536 FirstFirst ... 375425465471472473474475476477478479485525 ... LastLast
Results 7,111 to 7,125 of 8026

Thread: Amanda Knox gets 26 Years

  1. #7111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabrizio View Post
    From today's NYTimes:

    Excerpt


    Justice Flunks Math
    ITALY’S highest court on Tuesday overturned the acquittal of Amanda Knox, accused of the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher, a 21-year-old British woman who was Knox’s roommate in Perugia, Italy, at the time.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/27/op...ml?ref=opinion
    In case anyone thinks this article has some validity because it is from the New York Times, it is both and editorial (labled as "opinion") and written by one of the anti-Knox crusaders from the PMF.org site. A person who has irrationally been finding ways to twist logic for years, as long as it makes Amanda and Raffaele look bad.

    Not to mention that her point of view makes no sense.

    Just an FYI

  2. #7112

    Default

    Leila Schneps, a mathematician and mystery writer...

    Mystery writer. Fits right in.

    Like I said...the circus is back.

    And why does everyone have to wait 90 days to find out why the judges made a ruling? Don't these assholes know right now?

  3. #7113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp View Post
    Leila Schneps, a mathematician and mystery writer...

    Mystery writer. Fits right in.

    Like I said...the circus is back.

    And why does everyone have to wait 90 days to find out why the judges made a ruling? Don't these assholes know right now?
    I think they know, but they need the 90 days to figure out how to explain it to us!

    Actually, no one really knows right now what they actually ruled, other than that the appeal verdict is overturned and it will have to go back for another appeal level trial. The details will be important.

  4. #7114

    Default

    Well, the judge that acquitted them is not backing down ...

    The judge who acquitted them:
    "I defy anyone to say that there was evidence "
    Claudio Pratillo Hellmann
    http://www.lastampa.it/2013/03/28/it...bO/pagina.html

    English translation here:

    Claudio Pratillo Hellmann is a judge in retirement. Not just any judge: on 3rd October 2009 (sic) he had read out the verdict (annulled the day before yesterday by the Supreme Court) in which Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were acquitted for not having committed the murder of Meredith Kercher. At the time Pratillo was the president of the Appeal Court of Assizes of Perugia, called to decide upon the brutal crime against the English student found dead 2nd November 2007. To appeal were the defendants, convicted in the first trial to 25 and 26 years of imprisonment. Last Monday, in going over the case in the Supreme Court, to undo the acquittal decided by the Appeal Court, the General Prosecutor Luigi Riello used strong words: “The Judge that took this decision lost his way”, that acquittal verdict “is a mass of violations of law and of logic”.


    Well, here is what the Judge who allegedly lost his way thinks: “The Prosecutors have their opinion, but it’s the Judge who casts the verdict. And so it’s in the motivations of the Supreme Court that we will have to read whether the Court that I presided over had lost reason. In any case, the Prosecutor General will have read and interpreted the facts differently from us, but the words he used against us seem somewhat excessive. And above all, which law would we have violated?”.


    Exactly, President, can you tell us: were there violations of law? Is it true the story about pressure exerted by America because they wanted Amanda to return home as a free citizen?
    Absolutely not. Just consider that we inherited a case already finished, in which we only had to evaluate the evidence. We didn’t request any additional investigation, the only action we initiated was to ask for an evaluation of the genetic evidence, both the prosecution and the defense considered the DNA on the exhibits the decisive evidence to win the case.


    In other words, in essence you based your findings on the same evidence of the Judges of the first court that inspired exemplary convictions, of 26 and 25 years in prison, but for you indicated full acquittal?
    Exactly. We examined that evidence, that in our judgment was not convincing. It wasn’t convincing above all in light of a careful re-reading of the Penal Code of Law, which requires “an absolute certainty, beyond any reasonable doubt”, that -in this case – Knox and Sollecito were guilty. For this my conscience is clear. That is true for all of us. We were aware of going against the protests that indeed occurred the same evening outside the Tribunal, or against different interpretations like those of the Supreme Court. But we acted in accordance with our consciences.


    Do you think Amanda and Raffaele are innocent?
    This is not the point. We searched for the “legal truth”, which doesn’t mean it coincides with the objective truth, but which surely requires certain proof. In this case there were not certain proofs. There were only clues and they were also tenuous.


    What were these tenuous clues that in the first trial considered overwhelming proof?
    It was all centered around the knife found in Sollecito’s home and the bra clasp of the victim recovered, in a second visit, at the scene of the crime. All the other elements against them were nonsense [sciocchezze, silly, of no value].


    The DNA of the defendants on the murder weapon and on Meredith’s underwear weren’t proof?
    No. I’ll explain why. The Judge of the first trial had not considered necessary a technical evaluation [of the genetic evidence]. He based his findings on the work of the Scientific Police. For the prosecutors it was sufficient to close their case, but when the defense of the accused – in the second trial – focused on the challenges of the incongruities resulting in that evaluation, we decided to ask for an independent review. The professors, in our view the best available, completely dismantled the biological evidence.


    It wasn’t the DNA of the defendants?
    Yes, but on the blade of the knife the traces were so tenuous that the genetic map of DNA to whom they could have belonged was too wide. Those minor traces – other than Knox and Sollecito – could have been attributed even to me, in other words compatible with the DNA of the President of the Court.


    And Meredith’s bra clasp?
    It’s true that there was DNA that could be attributed to Sollecito, but there were also the DNA of three other men, demonstrating that it had been compromised by the contamination at the crime scene. That exhibit, photographed on the first day of the investigation, had been left there, in the bedroom. Only a month and a half later did they decide to recover and analyze it. But it was immediately noticeable that, compared to the photographs of the crime scene, the bra had been moved by more than a meter and had ended up under a mat.


    However, even if the other three male DNA could have been of the police officers who entered later during the course of the month without the white protective clothing, the traces of Sollecito were in any case on the bra.
    But Sollecito frequented that house. He was the boyfriend of Knox, who was the flatmate of Kercher. And indeed on the day of the crime he had lunched in the house on Via della Pergola.


    But he wouldn’t have touched the underwear of a flatmate of his girlfriend.
    No-one says he did. DNA traces can be deposited even from fragments of skin cells. Infinitely small organic substances, that can be transported onto that bra clasp in a second moment. From the shoe of a police officer entering the house in that month and a half or even by a gust of air.


    And Amanda’s famous memorandum from where it seems the Supreme Court will request to restart? The confession written where she accused Patrick Lumumba?
    It wasn’t in the court records and I don’t know its contents.


    Indeed the memorandum was not included in the court records, the Judge of the first trial held that it was inadmissible. Another unclear point.
    I didn’t even know it existed. But if this memorial was so important, the prosecutors would have requested to include it in the Appeal.


    According to the General Prosecutor, and maybe also of the Supreme Court who agreed to the request to re-do the trial, the accusations against Lumumba would be proof of Amanda’s guilt. If innocent, one doesn’t accuse another person.
    In convicting Knox of slander, we explained that the girl was put under a hard interrogation by the Police. Without a lawyer. Without sleeping and with an interpreter who encouraged her to put an end to that long confrontation. In that context, she said the name of Patrick. It didn’t come from nowhere, but only after she had been challenged about an exchange of SMS with him. Lumumba was her boss, and for that they had written to each other. Accusing him could have seemed to her a way out to escape from that tight spot. Remember that Amanda was a very young girl, recently arrived in Italy and she didn’t speak our language very well. For me it was logical that in that context she could say the wrong things. Let’s wait for the motivations of the Supreme Court to understand what didn’t convince those Judges.

  5. #7115

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp View Post
    I heard there are more lawyers in Milan than all of France.
    Sorry, what I should have written was:

    And I heard there are more lawyers in NYC than in all of France.

    So?


    http://askville.amazon.com/lawyers-Y...questId=298438

  6. #7116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougm View Post
    Well, the judge that acquitted them is not backing down ...

    The judge who acquitted them:
    "I defy anyone to say that there was evidence "
    Claudio Pratillo Hellmann
    http://www.lastampa.it/2013/03/28/it...bO/pagina.html

    English translation here:
    That "english translation" has nothing to do with the link posted. It is not the article in the link.

    Would you please post the original link to the article? thanks.

  7. #7117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabrizio View Post
    So?
    Lame. You were wrong, and then repeated it.

    So?

  8. #7118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabrizio View Post
    That "english translation" has nothing to do with the link posted. It is not the article in the link.

    Would you please post the original link to the article? thanks.
    I will take a look, and if I made a mistake, I will gladly correct.

  9. #7119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp View Post

    So?


    They really must do something about France's dearth of lawyers.

  10. #7120

    Default Correction

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabrizio View Post
    That "english translation" has nothing to do with the link posted. It is not the article in the link.

    Would you please post the original link to the article? thanks.
    I think I matched it to the wrong Hellmann article, I thought there was only one. Try this:

    The interview, says the judge: "That's why I acquitted Amanda"
    Missing evidence, expert opinions, errors investigation: the judge Pratillo Hellmann says to "free" because the Appeals acquitted Knox and Raffaele Sollecito

    http://www.lastampa.it/2013/03/28/it...bO/pagina.html

  11. #7121

    Default

    It's funny how you're the one who brought up this comparison stuff:
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabrizio View Post
    A broken criminal justice system compared to who?
    It's all part of the "Italy's shit doesn't stink" stuff we have to wade through.

  12. #7122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougm View Post
    I think I matched it to the wrong Hellmann article, I thought there was only one. Try this:
    Nope.

    Still not the article.

  13. #7123

    Default

    eddhead you posted in no uncertain terms:

    Quote Originally Posted by eddhead View Post
    ...the Council Of Europe's decree on double jeopardy holds no water. She was acquited and is now being retried. That is double jeopardy.
    Could you please substantiate this from an authoritative source?

    Thanks in advance.

  14. #7124
    Forum Veteran MidtownGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    East Midtown
    Posts
    6,832

    Default

    Thanks for the article, dougm.

    So Hellman basically reiterates the points made by many of us on this thread hundreds of pages ago.
    This :"It was all centered around the knife found in Sollecito’s home and the bra clasp of the victim recovered, in a second visit, at the scene of the crime. All the other elements against them were nonsense" basically sums it up in a nutshell. When those items fall apart under scrutiny, there's just nothing left.

    I'll never understand the axe that people still grind, despite all we know. The other day I was reading the piece in the NY Times and Peter Quenell was all over every remark in the comments section, like some kind of obsessed nutcase.

  15. #7125

    Default

    All the other elements against them were nonsense
    The shortest description that captures the entire five years.

Similar Threads

  1. London's Congestion Charge Two Years On
    By ablarc in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 192
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2008, 10:43 AM
  2. New Years Eve in Time Square
    By clasione in forum Social Club
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: January 3rd, 2005, 06:18 PM
  3. Airtrain Newark, two years and still growing
    By STT757 in forum New York Metro
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 27th, 2003, 10:17 PM
  4. Almost 2 years later, the events of 9.11.01 still hurt
    By Qtrainat1251 in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 10th, 2003, 10:34 PM
  5. Where to live? - Possibly moving to NYC in a few years...
    By Jonny in forum Moving to New York
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: May 21st, 2003, 11:48 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software