Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#4

[otto]

So that's a 'no' then... right, well that was productive! :floorlaugh:

I'm serious and curious. What are "sides" when it comes to the justice system that is established in a country? Are there recognized "sides" whereby people either agree, or disagree, with the justice system and laws of their country? This is a completely foreign concept for me. I've certainly heard of people that refuse to accept a law of the land, but is that a recognized side, or are those people that just don't want to pay taxes?

 

[Sonata]

I'm serious and curious. What are "sides" when it comes to the justice system that is established in a country? Are there recognized "sides" whereby people either agree, or disagree, with the justice system and laws of their country? This is a completely foreign concept for me. I've certainly heard of people that refuse to accept a law of the land, but is that a recognized side, or are those people that just don't want to pay taxes?

No, but there are sides on an internet forum. Particularly this one of all threads.

You can deny that as much as you like, but there are pages and pages of what is effectively two sides hashing it out. Quibbling over terminology doesn't really get us anywhere.

 

[otto]

No, but there are sides on an internet forum. Particularly this one of all threads.

You can deny that as much as you like, but there are pages and pages of what is effectively two sides hashing it out. Quibbling over terminology doesn't really get us anywhere.

I certainly realize that many people refuse to accept the justice system and laws of Italy because they don't want the woman from Seattle to be imprisoned for murder. However, I have to ask whether it is reasonable. For example, is it reasonable to say that in the United Kingdom, the police, prosecutors, DNA experts, juries, Judges and the Supreme court are all corrupt, or is it only reasonable to say that of Italy?

I really don't understand the "side" that would say that all levels of justice and law in the UK are corrupt and wrong. Additionally, in the UK, if a Judge ordered two experts to complete a task and they failed to complete that task, would that be acceptable?

 

[Sonata]

I certainly realize that many people refuse to accept the justice system and laws of Italy because they don't want the woman from Seattle to be imprisoned for murder. However, I have to ask whether it is reasonable. For example, is it reasonable to say that in England, the police, prosecutors, DNA experts, juries, Judges and the Supreme court are all corrupt, or is it only reasonable to say that of Italy?

You seem to be suggesting 2 things:

1. That there is a bias regarding nationality
2. That there is not sense in questioning authority

I find these equally troubling.

 

[otto]

You seem to be suggesting 2 things:

1. That there is a bias regarding nationality
2. That there is not sense in questioning authority

I find these equally troubling.

There does appear to be a bias regarding nationality, and when questioning authority essentially means slandering every level of the justice system and the laws of the country, I have to wonder whether there is any objectivity. What is the "side" called when the legal system of an EU country, and everyone that practices in that legal system, is alleged to be incompetent and corrupt?

I don't mean to be contrary and I could understand if the position was that one piece of DNA evidence was questionable, or that one position presented by the prosecutor was difficult to understand, or that the Supreme court made a ruling that didn't make sense, but when there is a blanket statement that everything is incorrect except the Judge whose ruling was ignored by experts ... I don't get it. Similarly every single piece of evidence is criticized, but never for the same reason. That says that there is not one problem, or even two problems, with the investigation, but that everything that occurred in the investigation is problematic. What are the chances of that being true?

 

[SMK]

There does appear to be a bias regarding nationality, and when questioning authority essentially means slandering every level of the justice system and the laws of the country, I have to wonder whether there is any objectivity. What is the "side" called when the legal system of an EU country, and everyone that practices in that legal system, is alleged to be incompetent and corrupt?

I don't mean to be contrary and I could understand if the position was that one piece of DNA evidence was questionable, or that one position presented by the prosecutor was difficult to understand, or that the Supreme court made a ruling that didn't make sense, but when there is a blanket statement that everything is incorrect except the Judge whose ruling was ignored by experts ... I don't get it. Similarly every single piece of evidence is criticized, but never for the same reason. That says that there is not one problem, or even two problems, with the investigation, but that everything that occurred in the investigation is problematic. What are the chances of that being true?

I can understand what you're saying here; and to a large degree identify with some of your frustration:

Although I myself long believed Knox and Sollecito were innocent (and am still willing to entertain this at least, and do not preclude their innocence in my doubting and questioning) , had much respect for the work of Hendry and Fisher, and for the excellent powers of logic displayed on JREF; and was annoyed and angered at the "trashing " of Knox by the media, by PMFers, and by Mignini at least in part -------

--even so, I began to sense rather early on that there was something wrong with the portrayal of Mignini, Massei, et al as thoroughly in the wrong, thoroughly immersed in anti-Americanism and anti-feminism, wholly incompetent, biased, prejudiced, corrupt, morally bankrupt, irrational in their thinking, illogical, blind to reason, given to an Italian medieval mania and folly, etc.

In the end, this is what brought me round to taking an objective look at all the facts (while maintaining my distaste for those who go overboard in the "trashing" the 2 defendants.). And on the eve of Hellmann's overturning, I had predicted that his rulings would not be upheld, while many more "logical" posters had hooted at this. So I believe I was less prejudicial and therefore could prophesy correctly how the court would rule.

 

[Allusonz]

Judges weigh evidence. They are not expected to be experts in every field of study that is introduced in a courtroom. Regarding C & V, the academics, I think it will be very easy to find many people that do not hold academic work in higher esteem than field work.

Clearly, in the case you reference, the judge reviewed the evidence and accepted that transference was likely through various mechanisms. In this case, C & V have been unable to present any logical argument regarding the realistic transference of evidence. Clearly, the cases have nothing in common.

Once again the facts of this case are being misrepresented.


Neither Hellman nor C & V needed to prove it. Why you ask? The error that was introduced has been memorialized by the PLE, on VIDEO, and in fact this entire collection process was broadcast in Italy. It showed in to any layman, familiar with the internationally accepted protocols and procedures, that the entire process was unworthy of judicial or public confidence.

One cannot eliminate the error in collection that was introduced. This particular piece of evidence should never of been allowed into trial whether that be in Italy or the United States.

During this video, everyone should note how instead of keeping the crime scene from contamination, they instead dumped clothes and other objects into piles all over the place. This is but one of many that show the complete incompetence of Stephanoni and PLE.

As to an earlier part in this discussion, it was the defense for RS and AK that requested in their appeal that the handle be taken apart based on the experts' advice, and it was the prosecution which objected to this.

Dr. Greg Hampikian on the Knox-Sollecito case - YouTube

 

[otto]

I can understand what you're saying here: Although I myself long believed Knox and Sollecito were innocent (and am still willing to entertain this at least, and do not preclude their innocence in my doubting and questioning) , had much respect for the work of Hendry and Fisher, and for the excellent powers of logic displayed on JREF; and was annoyed and angered at the "trashing " of Knox by the media, by PMFers, and by Mignini at least in part -------

--even so, I began to sense rather early on that there was something wrong with the portrayal of Mignini, Massei, et al as thoroughly in the wrong, thoroughly immersed in anti-Americanism and anti-feminism, wholly incompetent, biased, prejudiced, corrupt, morally bankrupt, irrational in their thinking, illogical, blind to reason, given to an Italian medieval mania and folly, etc.

In the end, this is what brought me round to taking an objective look at all the facts (while maintaining my distaste for those who go overboard in the "trashing" the 2 defendants.). And on the eve of Hellmann's overturning, I had predicted that his rulings would not be upheld, while many more "logical" posters had hooted at this. So I believe I was less prejudicial and therefore could prophesy correctly how the court would rule.

People that are convicted of brutally murdering female University students are usually trashed.

 

[otto]

Once again the facts of this case are being misrepresented.


Neither Hellman nor C & V needed to prove it. Why you ask? The error that was introduced has been memorialized by the PLE, on VIDEO, and in fact this entire collection process was broadcast in Italy. It showed in to any layman, familiar with the internationally accepted protocols and procedures, that the entire process was unworthy of judicial or public confidence.

One cannot eliminate the error in collection that was introduced. This particular piece of evidence should never of been allowed into trial whether that be in Italy or the United States.

During this video, everyone should note how instead of keeping the crime scene from contamination, they instead dumped clothes and other objects into piles all over the place. This is but one of many that show the complete incompetence of Stephanoni and PLE.

As to an earlier part in this discussion, it was the defense for RS and AK that requested in their appeal that the handle be taken apart based on the experts' advice, and it was the prosecution which objected to this.

Dr. Greg Hampikian on the Knox-Sollecito case - YouTube

And ... this would represent the criticism of those that collected crime scene DNA that resulted in the conviction of Rudy Guede, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito? They got everything right when they collected evidence Guede, and everything wrong when they collected evidence of Sollecito and Knox?

 

[SMK]

People that are convicted of brutally murdering female University students are usually trashed.

well, I think I meant prior to the verdict being finalized. It was the rest of my post that I hoped you would relate to. :tantrum:

 

[Allusonz]

There does appear to be a bias regarding nationality, and when questioning authority essentially means slandering every level of the justice system and the laws of the country, I have to wonder whether there is any objectivity. What is the "side" called when the legal system of an EU country, and everyone that practices in that legal system, is alleged to be incompetent and corrupt?

I don't mean to be contrary and I could understand if the position was that one piece of DNA evidence was questionable, or that one position presented by the prosecutor was difficult to understand, or that the Supreme court made a ruling that didn't make sense, but when there is a blanket statement that everything is incorrect except the Judge whose ruling was ignored by experts ... I don't get it. Similarly every single piece of evidence is criticized, but never for the same reason. That says that there is not one problem, or even two problems, with the investigation, but that everything that occurred in the investigation is problematic. What are the chances of that being true?

Thank goodness bias does not play a role in science, only the people that continue to try and state that errors were not introduced in the DNA collection. Not one item from what I have seen from all the collection videos should of been allowed to be introduced at any trial at any place in any country in the world.

These protocols and procedures are internationally accepted. Stephanoni does not even hold a doctorate, made up new procedures the scientific community had never seen previously.

It is not about politics, or what one believes may of happened. The DNA evidence does not validate the prosecutions theory and in fact contradicts it.

As was the case many of you that have recently seen in the Ryan Ferguson case, wrongful convictions happen all over the world. It is very easy to be convicted of a crime, but close to impossible to have an unsafe verdict vacated.

Prosecutors have far too much power without checks and balances in place.

This should give everyone pause and if it does not, then one is not dealing in the realities of the case.

When anyone sees a repeated pattern of violations, one must question with vigor the motivations behind the continued onslaught.

 

[otto]

I can understand what you're saying here; and to a large degree identify with some of your frustration:

Although I myself long believed Knox and Sollecito were innocent (and am still willing to entertain this at least, and do not preclude their innocence in my doubting and questioning) , had much respect for the work of Hendry and Fisher, and for the excellent powers of logic displayed on JREF; and was annoyed and angered at the "trashing " of Knox by the media, by PMFers, and by Mignini at least in part -------

--even so, I began to sense rather early on that there was something wrong with the portrayal of Mignini, Massei, et al as thoroughly in the wrong, thoroughly immersed in anti-Americanism and anti-feminism, wholly incompetent, biased, prejudiced, corrupt, morally bankrupt, irrational in their thinking, illogical, blind to reason, given to an Italian medieval mania and folly, etc.

In the end, this is what brought me round to taking an objective look at all the facts (while maintaining my distaste for those who go overboard in the "trashing" the 2 defendants.). And on the eve of Hellmann's overturning, I had predicted that his rulings would not be upheld, while many more "logical" posters had hooted at this. So I believe I was less prejudicial and therefore could prophesy correctly how the court would rule.

I did notice that there was a shift from "absolute guilt" to "let's take another look at the case", and it has made for interesting dialogue.

 

[SMK]

Thank goodness bias does not play a role in science, only the people that continue to try and state that errors were not introduced in the DNA collection. Not one item from what I have seen from all the collection videos should of been allowed to be introduced at any trial at any place in any country in the world.

These protocols and procedures are internationally accepted. Stephanoni does not even hold a doctorate, made up new procedures the scientific community had never seen previously.

It is not about politics, or what one believes may of happened. The DNA evidence does not validate the prosecutions theory and in fact contradicts it.

As was the case many of you that have recently seen in the Ryan Ferguson case, wrongful convictions happen all over the world. It is very easy to be convicted of a crime, but close to impossible to have an unsafe verdict vacated.

Prosecutors have far too much power without checks and balances in place.

This should give everyone pause and if it does not, then one is not dealing in the realities of the case.

When anyone sees a repeated pattern of violations, one must question with vigor the motivations behind the continued onslaught.

It's true that there MUST absolutely be strict, vigorous checks and balances on prosecutors and police. No doubt of that at all.

 

[Allusonz]

And ... this would represent the criticism of those that collected crime scene DNA that resulted in the conviction of Rudy Guede, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito? They got everything right when they collected evidence Guede, and everything wrong when they collected evidence of Sollecito and Knox?

AK's and RS's appeals requested the knife be taken apart.

It was the PROSECUTOR's that OBJECTED.

Please tell me what is wrong with this picture?

 

[otto]

Thank goodness bias does not play a role in science, only the people that continue to try and state that errors were not introduced in the DNA collection. Not one item from what I have seen from all the collection videos should of been allowed to be introduced at any trial at any place in any country in the world.

These protocols and procedures are internationally accepted. Stephanoni does not even hold a doctorate, made up new procedures the scientific community had never seen previously.

It is not about politics, or what one believes may of happened. The DNA evidence does not validate the prosecutions theory and in fact contradicts it.

As was the case many of you that have recently seen in the Ryan Ferguson case, wrongful convictions happen all over the world. It is very easy to be convicted of a crime, but close to impossible to have an unsafe verdict vacated.

Prosecutors have far too much power without checks and balances in place.

This should give everyone pause and if it does not, then one is not dealing in the realities of the case.

When anyone sees a repeated pattern of violations, one must question with vigor the motivations behind the continued onslaught.

The Ferguson case is identical to what Knox attempted to do to Patrick. That is, Knox falsely accused Patrick and he was arrested. Fortunately, Italian police sought the truth and Patrick was released after two weeks.

With Ferguson, after he was falsely accused by a friend, he was arrested and put in prison. Police then coerced witnesses and used his friend's false testimony to put him in prison for 40 years. Fortunately, Patrick was in Italy rather than the US, because otherwise he would have been imprisoned for 40 years too.

 

[Allusonz]

I did notice that there was a shift from "absolute guilt" to "let's take another look at the case", and it has made for interesting dialogue.

It has made for many unsafe theories again being tried to be introduced into the discussion. This is wrong. It does not matter what country you are from.

Italy does have one reason to make sure that AK is found guilty and that happens to be money for being wrongly incarcerated.

Politics should not overlap with any judicial system. Unfortunately, we are seeing this happening with a great deal of frequency.

 

[dgfred]

'memorialized'? but dropped with Hellmann. Right.

errors in collection? But collection and results accepted by Court.

dumped clothes? What day and when?

Prosecution Objection??? Why would they want more testing after getting a conviction with the evidence presented? Nothing is wrong with that picture IMO.

 

[Allusonz]

The Ferguson case is identical to what Knox attempted to do to Patrick. That is, Knox falsely accused Patrick and he was arrested. Fortunately, Italian police sought the truth and Patrick was released after two weeks.

With Ferguson, after he was falsely accused by a friend, he was arrested and put in prison. Police then coerced witnesses and used his friend's false testimony to put him in prison for 40 years. Fortunately, Patrick was in Italy rather than the US, because otherwise he would have been imprisoned for 40 years too.

Sorry it is not.

This is the case of a prosecutor that ignored evidence, committed Brady violations, and was caught.

This is a case of a very sloppy investigation, in which an innocent man was wrongly convicted on tampered testimony of Trump and Ferguson.

The prosecutor and investigators are the ones that should be in jail. Period!!! Any LE that uses these tactics to get a "false confession", should be held accountable whether here or in Italy. They are suppose to be the professionals. Period.

 

[Allusonz]

'memorialized'? but dropped with Hellmann. Right.

errors in collection? But collection and results accepted by Court.

dumped clothes? What day and when?

Prosecution Objection??? Why would they want more testing after getting a conviction with the evidence presented? Nothing is wrong with that picture IMO.

Watch the video fred. It has been posted enough times, and this is only ONE portion of the video.

If you recall, this entire process was televised to Italians, otherwise we may never of seen this video just like we have never seen the video of AK's interrogation. In the Ryan Ferguson case, we did see the interrogation and Erickson did not know any details of the crime.

 

[dgfred]

I have seen the video many times. Which part was accepted at trial as contamination or collection wrongdoing?