809 users online (83 members and 726 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 76
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Karmady View Post
    Assuming that Italian Judges are even remotely similar to American judges wrt ethical responsibility and common judicial sense, he could not have been "set up" by the media. The only thing he should have said, if anything, was, no comment. Judges rarely speak to the media about their current cases and, if they do, it definitely isn't to suggest that a defendants' failure to testify impacted the decision in any way. Here, at least, that would be an OMFG moment, imo. It's almost as if he had to have done it on purpose.

    ALL JMO
    BBM - This had actually occurred to me. The verdict was solid and expected to sail through the Supreme Court of Cassation. To speak as he did put all in peril, and set the defense in good order for an appeal. It's as if he aimed at this.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,161
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    BBM - This had actually occurred to me. The verdict was solid and expected to sail through the Supreme Court of Cassation. To speak as he did put all in peril, and set the defense in good order for an appeal. It's as if he aimed at this.
    I agree with this. So what was the intent? It seems that it was obvious that both AK & RS were going to appeal if the verdict was against them, so why would the Judge need to push that? Do you think it was to ensure that at a minimum, RS would speak at the appeal?

    Salem

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    I agree with this. So what was the intent? It seems that it was obvious that both AK & RS were going to appeal if the verdict was against them, so why would the Judge need to push that? Do you think it was to ensure that at a minimum, RS would speak at the appeal?

    Salem
    That had crossed my mind. To create a path for Sollecito to speak out against Knox.

    Either that, or he had some desire to put the case on someone else; make it their final responsibility.

    The whole thing seemed surreal to me, because during the process, Nencini seemed very terse, curt, aloof, stern. He seemed the very model of propriety and caution. Not at all the type to just start rambling off the cuff.

    People (many more knowledgeable than I) keep telling me it will come to naught - and I am trying to view it this way. I wish they would give some timeline of when their inquiry will be settled on this matter.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,981
    I'm still trying to understand what is going on with this, but it looks like something Justice Nencini said led Sollecito to believe that had he testified, it could all be different.

    I think this is somehow out of context; a disconnect. I think it comes down to Justice Nencini suggesting that he could not give different sentences to the two defendants because the case could not be separated. He points out that Sollecito did not testify. Although Sollecito has the right to remain silent (could not be compelled to testify), he chose to remain silent. That empty seat and silent voice spoke volumes. I think that Sollecito is morphing this to: if he had testified, he might have been found not guilty and Knox might still have been found guilty.

    I wonder if a new trial could be ordered for Sollecito on that basis, where he would testify and submit to cross-examination. Knox doesn't benefit from this as far as I can see. Am I missing something? She testified and was still found guilty on both counts.

    It seems to be, in my opinion, about splitting the defendants, but it is far too late for this. It is my understanding that Justice Nencini is saying that there is too much evidence to split the decision. It's also too late. However, the Italian system is defendant friendly, so perhaps a consideration will be given to severing the defense and allowing Sollecito to testify. He's had 7 years to think of good answers, and he ran his stories past a broad audience with the publication of his book. He should have his story straight by now ... all he needs is one more chance to debate the same point?

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    I agree with this. So what was the intent? It seems that it was obvious that both AK & RS were going to appeal if the verdict was against them, so why would the Judge need to push that? Do you think it was to ensure that at a minimum, RS would speak at the appeal?

    Salem
    I think so. It seems like forcing his hand to answer some difficult questions. Can he demonstrate that he was at home between the time that he turned off his phone and the time that he turned on his computer given that this type of electronic silence had never happened before with either Raffaele or Amanda. There is evidence of his participation in a murder. Does he have an explanation for that evidence?

    I could see defendant's rights permitting Sollecito to be heard. I'm not convinced that this would make any difference for Knox, but she could benefit if his verdict was over turned, as it would give her, the defendant, an appeal on the basis of a mistake having been made once. I'm on a tangent, but Sollecito's lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno, said that she would turn it into a ping pong match.

    I think the judge said that he couldn't split the defense, meaning that there was no justification to issue different sentences, and added that Sollecito did not testify. That was opening the door for an appeal for Sollecito?

    Amanda? Did anything said by Justice Nencini compromise her verdict?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,981
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    What worries me is that the journalists may have "set him up" to bring down the verdict. He has political enemies as well.
    That sounds like the perspective, or viewpoint, that is inclined to believe that this will blow over. It's possible that the judge was set up, but he should be more dedicated to his decision than to spill an opinion to the first people he meets in the corridor. It's true that members of the jury that make a decision are not allowed to comment on the deliberations. However, Hellman set a precedent by speaking with the media in the context of settling international media curiosity. No one complained.

    It happened with Nencini, and it has introduced the political agenda of Berlesconi, assisted by Giulia Bongiorno, who objects to his sentence, and who apparently would like to remove a judge from the process? It appears that this was initiated by Sollecito's lawyer and that it was supported by political allies. That got the ball rolling.

    Best case scenario is that Sollecito will testify?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    Hellman too said somethings he shouldn't have IMO days after the verdict. Again no issues were raised because his verdict was in favor of defendants. Should've been considered unacceptable too though IMO

    http://seattletimes.com/html/localne...2_knox09m.html

    Even Judge Hellman scrambled to defend his decision, granting an interview to Italian journalists Wednesday. The Seattle Times has obtained an audio transcript of his surprisingly frank remarks, which reverberated through Italy's national papers Thursday.

    "Certainly Rudy Guede knows, but he hasn't said," Hellman said. "And maybe the two defendants know, too, because our decision to find not guilty is the result of the truth created within the context of the trial, but the real truth may be different. They may be responsible, but there is no proof. So maybe they know too, but we don't have anything to go on."

    "Normal kids"

    He expressed sympathy for the Kerchers, but noted he felt a responsibility toward the living, in this case, "two kids, little more than 20 years old."

    "It's not that I was able to get into the psyche of those two, my impressions were based on the images I saw and a few words they spoke but they seemed normal kids, as normal as many today, well behaved, composed, tested and forged and matured by this experience. That's all."
    BBM

    He based his opinion on "the images I saw and a few words they spoke"

    Does that sound different from comments based on behavioural observations and testimony given ... Sollecito didn't testify so the opinion was based on other evidence?

    Hellman stated that he could not find the truth when he over-ruled the decision.
    Last edited by otto; 02-06-2014 at 06:31 AM.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    BBM

    He based his opinion on "the images I saw and a few words they spoke"

    Does that sound different from comments based on behavioural observations and testimony given ... Sollecito didn't testify so the opinion was based on other evidence?

    Hellman stated that he could not find the truth when he over-ruled the decision.
    Yes Hellman's interview and words are disturbing too. Referring to them as "normal kids", seems to be a bias against RG. IMO. Does he feel he is a "normal kid"?

    The most interesting part IMO about what Nencini has said is about RSs defense asking to separate the two and him turning them down. It was clear in their closings that they were attempting to distance RS from AK and I remember many discussions about this taking place at the time. Now that has been confirmed, as it was denied by many saying GB was defending AK just as much as RS.

    I do think this will blow over after being reviewed. IMO his words have been taken out of context and it will get cleared up. The media tends to hear what they want to hear.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    15,337
    Good Morning, Y'All !


    Judge Nencini's report can't come soon enough ...

    Anxiously waiting to hear THIS court's reasons ...

    JMSSO = Just My Super Secret Opinion

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    15,337
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    What worries me is that the journalists may have "set him up" to bring down the verdict. He has political enemies as well.

    BBM:

    I truly believe Judge Nencini was "set up" as well as "ambushed" ...

    Journalists ? Maybe ...

    Defense Team ? Absolutely ...

    JMSSO = Just My Super Secret Opinion


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,639
    I don't know why is it so hard to understand why he said that the process was deprived of a voice? It is the defendant's right, but obviously, in every case, the truth can be better reached if the defendant speaks, no matter if he is guilty or innocent. IMO. I don't think there is anything more behind Nencini's words. It is so obvious what he meant, IMO, that people think he had some kind of deeper meaning or some meaning behind the words. I think he meant the words exactly as he said them.

    JMO.
    Now my philosophy is that it's never okay to kill someone. -- Convicted Murderer Jodi Arias

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,161
    This is the thread to discuss Judge Nencini's comments and the controversy surrounding them. Please stay on topic.

    Thanks,

    Salem

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.C., USA
    Posts
    3,242
    IIRC alot of the judges have spoken out before their motivations. Didn't Hellmann?
    The Seeker / Sports Freak /

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    Yes Hellman's interview and words are disturbing too. Referring to them as "normal kids", seems to be a bias against RG. IMO. Does he feel he is a "normal kid"?

    The most interesting part IMO about what Nencini has said is about RSs defense asking to separate the two and him turning them down. It was clear in their closings that they were attempting to distance RS from AK and I remember many discussions about this taking place at the time. Now that has been confirmed, as it was denied by many saying GB was defending AK just as much as RS.

    I do think this will blow over after being reviewed. IMO his words have been taken out of context and it will get cleared up. The media tends to hear what they want to hear.
    That's been my assumption from the beginning, but I do think that there is a slim possibility that Sollecito's objection could be given some weight. That could result in a new trial for Sollecito, where he will be expected to testify.

    What I heard loud and clear in Bongiorno's closing arguments was that Sollecito was not part of Knox's declarations and statements about the night of the murder. Sollecito has said that he should not be convicted because someone else (Knox) is "peculiar".

    Given the Judge's remarks, the strongest appeal that Sollecito can make is for a separation of defense and the opportunity to be cross examined. Would a defendant friendly justice system legitimately deny a defendant that request, even if it is made at the 11th hour?

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    That's been my assumption from the beginning, but I do think that there is a slim possibility that Sollecito's objection could be given some weight. That could result in a new trial for Sollecito, where he will be expected to testify.

    What I heard loud and clear in Bongiorno's closing arguments was that Sollecito was not part of Knox's declarations and statements about the night of the murder. Sollecito has said that he should not be convicted because someone else (Knox) is "peculiar".

    Given the Judge's remarks, the strongest appeal that Sollecito can make is for a separation of defense and the opportunity to be cross examined. Would a defendant friendly justice system legitimately deny a defendant that request, even if it is made at the 11th hour?
    http://www.firenzepost.it/2014/02/03...ref_map=%5B%5D

    This is in Italian but is a great article on the Nencini situation (there's a translation of it elsewhere that I read) but it can be put through a machine translation too I guess.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 97
    Last Post: 02-19-2014, 09:42 AM
  2. MySpace Links/Comments & Facebook comments
    By SeriouslySearching in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 706
    Last Post: 09-14-2008, 05:11 PM

Tags for this Thread