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

Status
Not open for further replies.
In terms of defense appeals, other than the comments from Nencini, on what basis do the defendants have justification for an appeal? We still don't know why Bongiorno requested that a photo of Sollecito's hands be admitted into evidence. The request was made at the beginning of the appeal, but nothing was said about it (at least nothing that was reported in the news). I'm curious whether an appeal could be made referencing that photo. For example, there was speculation that the defense would argue that his fingernails were too short to deposit DNA. I don't believe that, but is there something I'm missing? Was the request for the photo a random request?

Sollecito has been saying that he should not be convicted because someone else is "peculiar". Could that be an appeal point? Bongiorno has already described Knox as Amelie, and she made a reference to Roger Rabbit. Is she going to argue that Knox is so odd that she was misinterpreted as a murderer and that Sollecito, by association, is painted with the same brush?

Sollecito has also said that there is no evidence against him, and only some evidence against Knox. Will his appeal identify the evidence that stands against Knox (statements) and re-state that the evidence has nothing to do with Sollecito?

I wonder if there will be an appeal on the basis that there was prejudice against Sollecito because they were tried together.
I never heard about that photo request. Interesting.

I do feel that Sollecito believes (from whatever perspective) that he was pulled into the suspicions which were really directed more at Amanda (guilt by association).

I believe its going in that direction, yes (prejudice from being tried together - Nencini's remarks created an opening for this, and perhaps brought some resentment to a head as well). Maybe it will be argued that Sollecito dna on the bra clasp was due to Amanda being there.
 
I suspect that everything said by Sollecito today is something that is endorsed by his lawyer, and which will find it's way into the appeal. Today he claims that he was arrested because he carried a knife. However, that isn't true. His status was change from witness to suspect because he admitted that he told a lot of rubbish when he claimed that Knox was not with him on the night of the murder.

He claims that he has never been heard. If that's the case, what has his lawyer been talking about in court for the last several years?

"[Sollecito] told ANSA Friday he had been sidelined in the case as the ex-boyfriend of co-defendant Amanda Knox. ...

"I have never been heard. It has always been an Amanda-centric trial. No one has ever said anything about me. Only that I was Amanda's boyfriend," ...

"I was arrested for having a small utility knife in my pocket, which I carried around out of habit"

http://www.gazzettadelsud.it/news/english/79078/Sollecito-calls-murder-trial--Amanda-centric-.html
 
I never heard about that photo request. Interesting.

I do feel that Sollecito believes (from whatever perspective) that he was pulled into the suspicions which were really directed more at Amanda (guilt by association).

I believe its going in that direction, yes (prejudice from being tried together - Nencini's remarks created an opening for this, and perhaps brought some resentment to a head as well). Maybe it will be argued that Sollecito dna on the bra clasp was due to Amanda being there.

Regarding the DNA, that's certainly a possibility. The Knox in Innocent team strategy has very clearly been that Sollecito's DNA on the bra was a result of contamination. Investigators have always been blamed for this evidence. That is, the "incompetent, corrupt" investigators contaminated the evidence. The Supreme Court responded with the question of: "How did that contamination occur?", to which there was no answer.

It would be quite reasonable to suggest that Knox, who obviously had close contact with Sollecito, could have deposited it there. If tertiary transfer is possible through investigators, why wouldn't secondary transfer be possible through Knox? Bongiorno has wanted to implicate Knox to save Sollecito for years, and the only barrier was Sollecito's loyalty to Knox. I think that loyalty is gone.
 
Regarding the DNA, that's certainly a possibility. The Knox in Innocent team strategy has very clearly been that Sollecito's DNA on the bra was a result of contamination. Investigators have always been blamed for this evidence. That is, the "incompetent, corrupt" investigators contaminated the evidence. The Supreme Court responded with the question of: "How did that contamination occur?", to which there was no answer.

It would be quite reasonable to suggest that Knox, who obviously had close contact with Sollecito, could have deposited it there. If tertiary transfer is possible through investigators, why wouldn't secondary transfer be possible through Knox? Bongiorno has wanted to implicate Knox to save Sollecito for years, and the only barrier was Sollecito's loyalty to Knox. I think that loyalty is gone.
I believe that loyalty is gone now, as well. So do you think it's possible that Sollecito may have his conviction overturned while Knox's stands?
 
Perhaps a secondary source, but I trust its primary source, and I have wondered about the same plans re Sollecito:

Amanda Knox: Will Raffaele Sollecito incriminate ex-girlfriend?

Ever since presiding Judge Alessandro Nemecini said in an interview with Corriera Della Sera that Raffaele Sollecito could have helped himself had he testified in the Amanda Knox trial, rumors have been floating around Florence that it may only be a matter of time before her former boyfriend decides to co-operate with authorities in return for a better deal or even immunity for himself. Corriera Della Sera is a Milan newspaper with a daily circulation of over 800,000 and more than a million followers on the Internet.

Sollecito, still young at 29, is facing a daunting 25 years in prison, if the Court of Cassation (Italy's Supreme Court) upholds his recent sentence issued by Nemecini. Will the hint dropped by his presiding judge cause him to re-consider his position? After all, he did say during an HLN interview that, "No, I don't still love her."

He further characterized his connection with her as "one week in a dreamy relationship. My previous life is gone."

Several Italian observers speculated that during his recent CNN interview he was moving in the direction of implicating her when he said that he never would have been convicted if it weren't for Amanda. He also said there was no evidence against him other than that he was connected to Knox.
http://www.examiner.com/article/amanda-knox-will-raffaele-sollecito-incriminate-ex-girlfriend
 
I believe that loyalty is gone now, as well. So do you think it's possible that Sollecito may have his conviction overturned while Knox's stands?

I very much doubt that it is an option without firing his lawyers. Sollecito could try to make the argument that he was encouraged by his lawyers and Knox's lawyers to not testify on the grounds that they feared he would contradict Knox's testimony. He might be able to claim that he felt obligated to remain silent to support Knox, which he can now describe as a misguided, immature notion inspired by misplaced love. He has said that she is not the same person that he knew for two weeks in 2007. He describes his experience with her as "Alice in Wonderland". He can claim that he kept that vision of her in his mind for seven years, but that he now sees he was young, foolish and out of step with reality.

I don't think that firing his lawyers is an option at this late stage of the process, so he would have to carefully navigate around a claim that his lawyers advised him well - perhaps claiming that they advised him to testify, but that his loyalty to his illusion of Knox from 2007 prevented him from following their advice. He could describe the pressures he felt from Knox, her lawyers, her family, her friends, her US influences and the media to do what they wanted, to the extent that he did not protect his own interests. He might argue that now he sees things clearly and would like an opportunity to defend himself alone.

The DNA on the bra clasp can still fall into the contamination argument, but Knox is the source of the contamination. This is in fact the most logical explanation if contamination is to be accepted as a legitimate argument. The print on the bathmat has already been argued, by his experts, that it is not a clear print due to the bath mat material. He can explain the lies in the context of misguided loyalty to Knox, that each time he learned of evidence implicating her, he attempted to protect her. He can revert to the statement he gave to police on November 5 that he doesn't know if Knox went out that night, but she asked him to lie on her behalf. Regarding the knife, he can claim that she put the knife in his drawer after the murder to ensure that he wouldn't miss it ... and the evidence supports that although it was his knife, it was so well cleaned that there is no trace of him on the knife. In fact, the only evidence on the knife relates to Knox (prints, DNA) and Meredith (DNA).
 
Perhaps a secondary source, but I trust its primary source, and I have wondered about the same plans re Sollecito:

"Amanda Knox: Will Raffaele Sollecito incriminate ex-girlfriend?

Ever since presiding Judge Alessandro Nemecini said in an interview with Corriera Della Sera that Raffaele Sollecito could have helped himself had he testified in the Amanda Knox trial, rumors have been floating around Florence that it may only be a matter of time before her former boyfriend decides to co-operate with authorities in return for a better deal or even immunity for himself. Corriera Della Sera is a Milan newspaper with a daily circulation of over 800,000 and more than a million followers on the Internet.

Sollecito, still young at 29, is facing a daunting 25 years in prison, if the Court of Cassation (Italy's Supreme Court) upholds his recent sentence issued by Nemecini. Will the hint dropped by his presiding judge cause him to re-consider his position? After all, he did say during an HLN interview that, "No, I don't still love her."

He further characterized his connection with her as "one week in a dreamy relationship. My previous life is gone."

Several Italian observers speculated that during his recent CNN interview he was moving in the direction of implicating her when he said that he never would have been convicted if it weren't for Amanda. He also said there was no evidence against him other than that he was connected to Knox."

http://www.examiner.com/article/amanda-knox-will-raffaele-sollecito-incriminate-ex-girlfriend

BBM
I think this statement is based on Nencini's remark that if Knox had gone to work that night, the murder would not have happened. Sollecito is going to build on this. Knox did not go to work, and she hatched a plan. He'll argue that he is only guilty by association.

Simultaneously turning off their phones might be explained as an odd request from a "peculiar" woman. I don't remember the specifics anymore, but I do remember something about Knox asking men to play a game of making faces at each other when they were in bed. Perhaps their whirlwind relationship involved a number of little games. Sollecito was very inexperienced with women (one previous girlfriend), and certainly inexperienced with an American woman that moved into his apartment after seeing her at a classical music concert. Perhaps Knox asked Sollecito to play a little game of being out of touch with each other by turning off their phones while they were away from each other for a few hours on the evening of Nov 2. He might say that he complied with her unusual request, that he watched his Naruto anime, got more stoned and went to sleep ... that he doesn't remember anything until 5:32AM when he woke up, listened to some music, turned on his phone and so on. I think that if he had argued this from the beginning, he might not be facing 25 years in prison.

I wonder if Sollecito could squeeze another £600,000 out of a publisher for a book titled: Not Another Load of Rubbish.
 
The book image is fantastic!
 
I won't lie- Italian law confuses me. I'm reading Death in Italy now. It came in first. I'm thinking so far that if RS is smart, he will appeal separately from AK and distance himself completely.

He should have done this from the beginning. Any defense lawyer should have told him to do this. IMO, that wasn't his strategy because HE chose the strategy, choosing to go against what his lawyers advised him. I have no knowledge whatsoever of law, and even I can tell that his best strategy was to separate from Amanda (less evidence on him). So IMO, whatever he did was a/g what his lawyers advised him.

JMO.
 
In terms of defense appeals, other than the comments from Nencini, on what basis do the defendants have justification for an appeal? We still don't know why Bongiorno requested that a photo of Sollecito's hands be admitted into evidence. The request was made at the beginning of the appeal, but nothing was said about it (at least nothing that was reported in the news). I'm curious whether an appeal could be made referencing that photo. For example, there was speculation that the defense would argue that his fingernails were too short to deposit DNA. I don't believe that, but is there something I'm missing? Was the request for the photo a random request?

Sollecito has been saying that he should not be convicted because someone else is "peculiar". Could that be an appeal point? Bongiorno has already described Knox as Amelie, and she made a reference to Roger Rabbit. Is she going to argue that Knox is so odd that she was misinterpreted as a murderer and that Sollecito, by association, is painted with the same brush?

Sollecito has also said that there is no evidence against him, and only some evidence against Knox. Will his appeal identify the evidence that stands against Knox (statements) and re-state that the evidence has nothing to do with Sollecito?

I wonder if there will be an appeal on the basis that there was prejudice against Sollecito because they were tried together.

But, IMO, it's too late. That would be like someone pleading not-guilty, and then after jury convicts on 1st degree murder, turns around and says, oh I should have plead to 2nd degree murder. Or something like that. That's the risk they decided to take from the beginning.

IMO, it's too late. He can appeal things of substance, having to do with his trial. But he can't change his entire trial strategy.

IMO.
 
But, IMO, it's too late. That would be like someone pleading not-guilty, and then after jury convicts on 1st degree murder, turns around and says, oh I should have plead to 2nd degree murder. Or something like that. That's the risk they decided to take from the beginning.

IMO, it's too late. He can appeal things of substance, having to do with his trial. But he can't change his entire trial strategy.

IMO.
Well, he never admitted to having any part whatsoever in the crime. If his attorneys want to use Nencini's remarks to drive the wedge in on this aspect of his being brought in on suspicion of Amanda's criminal culpability, I think they can and will. (although of course I may be wrong, and you right :giggle: )
 
This is the topic of the thread... Please post accordingly... stay on topic with related subject material...

The Nencini Verdict and it's impact on the future : A thread to discuss how the court ruled, why, and what will be next....
Discuss possible defense appeals and the likely outcome of the Supreme Court of Cassation...
 
It will be interesting to see what this court comes up with for a motive. Will they repeat the silly claim from the first trial that smoking marijauna led to violence or come up with a new and equally bizarre theory?
 
So Nencini followed the orders as was expected of him. Saving face of the police force, as Crini put it in his argument.
Just following orders in not an excuse for the monstrous and evil thing he did, I think he knows it and it will haunt him.

JMO
 
What orders? Do you have a link/cite to that?

What monstrous and evil thing? Following the evidence and the testimony?
 
It will be interesting to see what this court comes up with for a motive. Will they repeat the silly claim from the first trial that smoking marijauna led to violence or come up with a new and equally bizarre theory?

What court? :banghead:

What motive? There is no need for a motive and only speculation based on incomplete evidence to guess at in the first place. Ask AK on her blog or email RS might be the only chance.

The Supreme Court verifies or rejects the ruling of N. N court has decided that the 1st instance trial was correct. The SC rejected (annuled) Hellmann's appeal verdict as being unsound and illogical.

Motive is a thing of TV IMO... alot of murders don't have any at all.

Would a prank like the one she did before that escalated be one? Maybe

Would a violent assault including RG induced by rage be one? Maybe

Would a drug induce stupor and lack of restraint lead to murder? Maybe

Would jealousy, anger and other emotions come flooding to the surface during an experiment with harder substances? Maybe

Would absolute stupidy lead to murdering someone for no reason. Maybe

Would following your new girlfriends lead make you do something you might regret? Maybe

Would the chance for new experiences lead to something getting out of hand and there was no turning back? Maybe

Maybe is the word that only leaves you guessing. :jail:
 
<modsnip>

http://www.coe.int/t/DGHL/cooperation/ccje/textes/OP_16_Italy.pdf

According to the link above, Italy has a code of ethical conduct applicable to judges. Unfortunately, I have do idea what it says as the lfurther link provided (below) is in Italian and is a pdf. From the first link:

Does your country have a Code of Ethics or equivalent for judges? (please specify)
Italy was the first, among European countries, to have a code of ethics for judges (and prosecutors). Reference to it is contained in Opinion no. 3 of the CCJE. For the background to the adoption of the ethical code, please see Italy’s answer to the questionnaire in preparation of Opinion no. 3. The code was amended in November 2010, and the new version is available on the CCJE’s website as an appendix to an article
(http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/CCJE/Onenparle/Foro_italiano_Magna_Carta.pdf ).
 
Hey Karmandy. Every judge in the case has made statements outside of court. Do you feel like he broke some rule or violated RS's rights in any way?
 
Hey Karmandy. Every judge in the case has made statements outside of court. Do you feel like he broke some rule or violated RS's rights in any way?

I would think so, especially since there's an inquiry. I wish I could read the rules, since I'm sure that would clear it up pretty well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
65
Guests online
2,438
Total visitors
2,503

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,934
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top