Meredith Kercher Murder: The Nencini Verdict and it's impact on the future

Status
Not open for further replies.
Where did this quote from AK come from?

I thought this was a topic thread about the Nencini verdict and it's impact?
What does Guede have to do with this topic?

The Supreme Court instructed the Nencinu court that they were to treat as fact that Geude was not the sole person who murdered Kercker based on what was determination during Guede's trial. A trial where AK and RS were not allowed to participate or have their interests represented.

Both the prosecution and defense in that trial had a vested interest in having more than one person participating in the murder. The prosecution wanted to try AK and RS for the same murder, and the defense wanted to imply that others were more responsible for this crime.

This by itself raises real concern about the fairness of the Nenceni verdict and may be grounds for appeal at the EU level.
 
The Supreme Court instructed the Nencinu court that they were to treat as fact that Geude was not the sole person who murdered Kercker based on what was determination during Guede's trial. A trial where AK and RS were not allowed to participate or have their interests represented.

Both the prosecution and defense in that trial had a vested interest in having more than one person participating in the murder. The prosecution wanted to try AK and RS for the same murder, and the defense wanted to imply that others were more responsible for this crime.

This by itself raises real concern about the fairness of the Nenceni verdict and may be grounds for appeal at the EU level.

Instructed? The SC annuled Hellmanns appeal verdict because it was illogical and unreasonable because of looking at select pieces of evidence.

The prosecution proved more than 1 person was involved.

The defense tried with zero success to bring others into the case.

There was NO evidence of others... just RS and AK.

What grounds for appeal at the EU level. What would be the grounds?

When will the EU get involved if ever?

Fighting extradition will be AK's last and totally unsuccessful attempt at avoiding responsibility IMO if Italy ask for it.
 
Really? I thought there was a lot of information in the article - she told several people what she'd done; the two guys arrested as accessories after the fact have explained their part and items from the deceased's apartment were found in the defendant's vehicle.

Sorry, you're right. The article you linked is much more informative than SMK's link.

Close friends, the arrested talking left and right about what she did.

There is no group scenario here and the evidence seems to be much more concrete than Perugian psychological obsevations.
 
Just wondering about the Supreme Court:

So after we get through Nencini's motivations report (by May 1?) and then when it is time for the Supreme Court to look at appeals (which can now be based only on procedural errors, and not evidence?) (which is supposed to be a one day process), this verdict (outside of these considerations) will be permanent (assuming it will stand) and the the extradition request would be its natural consequence.

Any idea what month the SCC would determine, and is there anything I am missing?

ETA: As I've said elsewhere, if the SCC does not see any point in rushing the process (even though the 2 convicted are clear flight risks) then I would expect both to flee (with full pro-innocence and media support) prior to any extradition process being set in motion.
Naw, you pretty much nailed it. ;) The evidentiary phase is done and the SCC just oversees that the trial/appeals courts followed the rules and laws. As we've already seen, the SCC also has the power to send a case back to the lower court but I doubt that will happen again.

I've read a ruling is expected from the SCC by spring of 2015. As far as I'm aware, Knox and Sollecito's attorneys are waiting to file appeals until after Nencini's report is released.

I'm really not certain the SCC even could rush the process...apart from the motions not even being filed yet, Italian courts are massively bogged down with other cases. If Knox and Sollecito were to flee, their only hope would be a country without an extradition treaty...and there's still likely a visa hurdle to get past. Most countries require foreign nationals obtain a visa. It's a process that's difficult, lengthy, and very expensive. Usually the process has to begin before you relocate and the host country has every right to refuse to grant a visa to the applicant. The alternative is residing in a country illegally but I think they may be a bit too recognisable to get away with it for long. MOO
 
What the heck!!!!

I just removed 20 off topic posts rehashing evidence and discussing another unrelated case. If you do not understand the topic of the thread then you need to contact a moderator. We are not rehashing the evidence - repeat- we are not rehashing the evidence. That has already been done in over 30 threads...
 
Instructed? The SC annuled Hellmanns appeal verdict because it was illogical and unreasonable because of looking at select pieces of evidence.

What grounds for appeal at the EU level. What would be the grounds?

yes, the SCC directed the outcome of this last trial. no doubt about it. heinous for a supposedly "neutral" entity like the supreme court imo.

grounds for ECHR appeal? possibly

The European Court of Human Rights ruled on April 26 partially in favor of complaints lodged by the Girgvliani family against the Georgian government, saying that the investigation into the high-profile murder case of Sandro Girgvliani “manifestly lacked the requisite independence, impartiality, objectivity and thoroughness” and ordered the government to pay to the family EUR 50,000 non-pecuniary damage.

Applicants – Irina Enukidze (mother of Sandro Girgvliani, who died in August, 2007 after lodging the application) and Guram Girgvliani (the father) – claimed that the rights under article 2 (right to life); article 3 (prohibition of torture); article 6 (right to a fair trial) and article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms were violated. The Girgvliani family also complained under Article 38 (examination of the case) of the Convention that the Georgian government has not submitted to the European Court all the evidence necessary for the examination of the case.

??

http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=23376
 
yes, the SCC directed the outcome of this last trial. no doubt about it. heinous for a supposedly "neutral" entity like the supreme court imo.

grounds for ECHR appeal? possibly



??

http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=23376
RBBM

I won't debate the neutrality of the SCC. I kinda believe if one thinks Italy is corrupt, little will sway such sentiment (though the Italian judiciary is largely autonomous - unlike other countries) but I think something that may be getting lost in translation is what the likely outcome of any successful appeal would be on an EU level...

Absolute worst (or best ;)) case scenario is that Knox is successful in seeking such a remedy. The ECHR may sanction Italy, might send the case back to the court with revised interpretation of EU law....but there's a better chance of 'maiali volanti' than the ECHR granting a full out acquittal.

The EU courts will not be anyone's magical get out of jail free card.

JMO
 
... but I think something that may be getting lost in translation is what the likely outcome of any successful appeal would be on an EU level...

The EU courts will not be anyone's magical get out of jail free card.

am well aware what ECHR can/cannot do -- thanks.
 
It seems to me Nencini didn't allow the SCC to direct the outcome, he seemed to understand his reasoning would need to be sound either way.

SCC:


The outcome of such an organic evaluation will be decisive, not only to demonstrate the presence of the two defendants at the crime scene, but also possibly to clarify the subjective role of the people who committed this murder with Guede, against a range of possible scenarios, going from an original plan to kill to a change in the plan which was initially aimed only at involving the young English girl in a sexual game against her will to an act with the sole intention of forcing her into a wild group erotic game which violently took another course, getting out of control.​

http://www.thefreelancedesk.com/wp-c...sh-Version.pdf
 
Did you see where Nencini answered the specific questions about the SCC? Sorry I actually quoted them but they were snipped. That's what I was referring to, I know exactly what was in the Supreme Court reasoning.

yes, i've read the interview (that apparently has him in hot water)...

quoting nencini isn't good enough given the very clear SCC directive. can you instead link to perhaps an official document where it can be, clearly read, that the SCC does give him the options he speaks of?
 
yes, i've read the interview (that apparently has him in hot water)...

quoting nencini isn't good enough given the very clear SCC directive. can you instead link to perhaps an official document where it can be, clearly read, that the SCC does give him the options he speaks of?

Of course there isn't a document saying that but I believe he understands the SCC rulings better than us. He clearly says even considering RGs definitive rulings they could've concluded the 2 weren't there but they didn't consider that the truth. What he makes clear is a logical reasoning would be needed to back up an acquittal, which is something Hellman couldn't do.
 
Can we get a thread to discuss the books about this case?
 
Of course there isn't a document saying that but I believe he understands the SCC rulings better than us. He clearly says even considering RGs definitive rulings they could've concluded the 2 weren't there but they didn't consider that the truth. What he makes clear is a logical reasoning would be needed to back up an acquittal, which is something Hellman couldn't do.

Hellman's ruling made sense in terms of logic and science. It's the other rulings in this case that should offend anyone familiar with the rules of formal logic.
 
Hellman's ruling made sense in terms of logic and science. It's the other rulings in this case that should offend anyone familiar with the rules of formal logic.

Many people disagree
 
Can we get a thread to discuss the books about this case?

I think you would need to start a thread with your proposed topic and the mods would need to approve it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
1,574
Total visitors
1,759

Forum statistics

Threads
589,974
Messages
17,928,574
Members
228,028
Latest member
Kac1991
Back
Top