Judge Alessandro Nencini's comments

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
 
This is the thread to discuss Judge Nencini's comments and the controversy surrounding them. Please stay on topic.

Thanks,

Salem
 
IIRC alot of the judges have spoken out before their motivations. Didn't Hellmann?
 
Amber29 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
otto said:
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?
Click to expand...

http://www.firenzepost.it/2014/02/0...ction_type_map=["og.likes"]&action_ref_map=[]

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.
 
otto said:
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?
Click to expand...
I don't think it would. So is it possible that when Sollecito's attorneys called (post-Nencini comments) to "reopen all", it could mean a new trial for Sollecito only? (not Knox)
 
SMK said:
I don't think it would. So is it possible that when Sollecito's attorneys called (post-Nencini comments) to "reopen all", it could mean a new trial for Sollecito only? (not Knox)
Click to expand...

I don't know. The Judge only commented on the fact that Sollecito chose not to testify. Knox chose to not attend, but she did testify. I don't think Knox has a leg to stand on in terms of an appeal due to the Judge's casual remarks, but there may be a small opportunity for Sollecito to appeal. On the other hand, he made the decision to remain silent and the courts should not have to hold another trial because he has suddenly discovered that a defendant should submit to cross examination. Is he going to claim ineffective counsel?
 
otto said:
I don't know. The Judge only commented on the fact that Sollecito chose not to testify. Knox chose to not attend, but she did testify. I don't think Knox has a leg to stand on in terms of an appeal due to the Judge's casual remarks, but there may be a small opportunity for Sollecito to appeal. On the other hand, he made the decision to remain silent and the courts should not have to hold another trial because he has suddenly discovered that a defendant should submit to cross examination. Is he going to claim ineffective counsel?
Click to expand...
Well, on Anderson Cooper he seemed to imply that Nencini ought to have realized, "if they don't ask me questions, then I cannot respond".
 
SMK said:
Well, on Anderson Cooper he seemed to imply that Nencini ought to have realized, "if they don't ask me questions, then I cannot respond".
Click to expand...

Sollecito ought to have realized that as a defendant in a murder trial he had the right to take the stand in his own defense and subject himself to cross examination. If he was unaware of this simple fact, then it is the fault of his counsel, not the Judge.
 
otto said:
Sollecito ought to have realized that as a defendant in a murder trial he had the right to take the stand in his own defense and subject himself to cross examination. If he was unaware of this simple fact, then it is the fault of his counsel, not the Judge.
Click to expand...
It was almost as if Sollecito were implying that the prosecution and judge should have asked him spontaneous questions......When Sollecito spoke before the jury, didn't Nencini say something to the effect that he ought to speak again? I seem to recall that....
 
otto said:
Sollecito ought to have realized that as a defendant in a murder trial he had the right to take the stand in his own defense and subject himself to cross examination. If he was unaware of this simple fact, then it is the fault of his counsel, not the Judge.
Click to expand...

There is no way to seperate at this point IMO.

He could have taken the stand- AK did.

He has been her alibi and she his all along. That is a funky sentence:facepalm:

His footprint on the bathmat and his dna on the bra-clasp place him at the scene in blood/staging.

He also turned off his phone... which puts him in on things from the beginning.

He realized the importance of the knife evidence (pricking story) and RG being returned to Italy (say strange things).

His behavior post appeal has been just as uninforming and deflective as AK.
Both his book and his internet interaction were filled with discrepancies.

Heck, IMO she could turn that around and totally blame him and RG... and revert back to in the kitchen screaming. That is just as credible at this point if you are going to believe any new scenario made by the two.
 
IIRC when RS did his spontaneous testimony it was focused on him being young with his whole life ahead of him and really didn't focus on the crime.

Now he seems to want to blame someone else for the fact he was self absorbed.

When you have 3 bites at the apple and still don't get it right it's hard to have sympathy. JMO

For those that think this system compromises double jeopardy, it also allows the defendants ample opportunity to address the evidence. But at some point you need to be realistic and acknowledge what's at stake and the circumstances you're dealing with. If your defense is there is no evidence and you hang your hat on that, then others are left to draw their own conclusions.
 
Does anyone know the time schedule for this investigation of Nencini? I wish they could be quick about it; after all, it was only a few sentences that he said.
 
SMK said:
Does anyone know the time schedule for this investigation of Nencini? I wish they could be quick about it; after all, it was only a few sentences that he said.
Click to expand...

True. There's not much to be said. The judge was in the corridor. Some journalists asked him a couple of questions. He answered. That information was published in Italian in Italy. Anyone that doesn't read Italian can only imagine what was really said.

Since then, we've learned from reading Italian articles that we don't really understand, that much has been made of nothing.

That's the long and short of it. It really has nothing to do with the case other than being another side show to the conviction of those responsible for the murder of Meredith Kercher.
 
otto said:
True. There's not much to be said. The judge was in the corridor. Some journalists asked him a couple of questions. He answered. That information was published in Italian in Italy. Anyone that doesn't read Italian can only imagine what was really said.

Since then, we've learned from reading Italian articles that we don't really understand, that much has been made of nothing.

That's the long and short of it. It really has nothing to do with the case other than being another side show to the conviction of those responsible for the murder of Meredith Kercher.
Click to expand...
Very true. But since they have opened up an official investigation, I wish they would just tell us what they've decided or when and how they will reach a decision, and what's entailed in it. Then the sideshow can be over and done with.....
 
SMK said:
Very true. But since they have opened up an official investigation, I wish they would just tell us what they've decided or when and how they will reach a decision, and what's entailed in it. Then the sideshow can be over and done with.....
Click to expand...

I suspect that it will be the same as any complaint against an officer of the court. It will slowly wind it's way through the process and, in the end, it will be recognized as within the confines of the law, and that will be the end of it. If it is not within the confines of the law, anything is possible. We can speculate all we want, but for what purpose? I'm more interested in facts than speculations and "what ifs".
 
SMK said:
Does anyone know the time schedule for this investigation of Nencini? I wish they could be quick about it; after all, it was only a few sentences that he said.
Click to expand...

I wonder if they will wait for his reasoning, so they can understand how they actually reached their verdict and on what grounds it is actually based.
 
Amber29 said:
I wonder if they will wait for his reasoning, so they can understand how they actually reached their verdict and on what grounds it is actually based.
Click to expand...
Good point - I wonder if he will be quick to do/release the motivations due to this- he has anywhere from 30-90 days. I wish it would be sooner rather than later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 210 more.
Total: 3,666 (members: 211, guests: 3,455)

Online statistics

Members online
211
Guests online
3,455
Total visitors
3,666
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,234
Messages
17,965,600
Members
228,729
Latest member
PoignantEcho
Back
Top