Amanda Knox, Sollecito, acquitted on appeal

http://news.sky.com/story/1454247/knox-and-sollecito-acquitted-of-kercher-murder

Knox And Sollecito Acquitted Of Kercher Murder
21:44, UK, Friday 27 March 2015



Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have been acquitted on appeal of the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.

More follows...

Let's hope that is the end of it. Oh, except for INCREASING the sentence of the person in jail for murdering Meredith.

The one that was given a reduced sentence by that insane prosecutor in return for help in framing those two dupes.

More-




Knox returned to the US before an appeal court threw out the acquittal and reinstated her and Sollecito's guilty verdicts last year.

But the eight-year legal saga could now be at an end after both convictions were annulled by Italy's Supreme Court.

Predictable shows of disbelief at the verdict of the Italian Supreme court.

Having followed the case from time to time, I really do not see how any other conculsion could have been reached. The prosecution and police failed to make any sort of case, and seemed to be more interested in supporting their theory than actually investigate. Parallels with the McCann case here.

There are no winners here. I feel particularly sorry for the Kercher family. However, locking up two innocents for 25 years will not provide the closure and justice they are seeking.

It's a tragedy that the Kercher family have been taken in by the outright lies from certain members of the prosecution, Jean-Pierre. Those two should never have been convicted in the first place, IMO.

It's interesting to read up on the mess the first prosecutor made of the 'Monster of Florence' investigation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuliano_Mignini

He's rotten to the core. So, no surprise then, that the McCann-haters chose to believe the lurid rubbish he invented about Knox and Sollecito.

Oh, I read that book. Mostly utterly boring. But I battled on. I can't even say that he ever contributed anything at all.

Just let's be thankful that he lost this one. Italy is now a laughing stock, on a par with Portugal. If only it was funny.

Okay. When is the next Trial? Only four so far. There must be room for a couple more. They might even be able to keep this going into the twenty second century. The arsehole who really did the dirty deed will be out by then, and probably living on benefits in The UK.

Sabot wrote:Oh, I read that book.  Mostly utterly boring.  But I battled on.  I can't even say that he ever contributed anything at all.

Just let's be thankful that he lost this one.  Italy is now a laughing stock, on a par with Portugal.  If only it was funny.

Okay.  When is the next Trial?  Only four so far.  There must be room for a couple more.  They might even be able to keep this going into the twenty second century.  The arsehole who really did the dirty deed will be out by then, and probably living on benefits in The UK.

I think that is it! No more trials. It will be hard for some to accept, sadly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/11502134/Amanda-Knox-in-line-for-compensation-worth-millions-following-her-prison-ordeal.html

Quote:

Friday’s verdict goes against that assertion, effectively concluding that the crime was committed by Guede alone. He has always denied being the murderer, claiming that he had consensual sex with Miss Kercher. He said that he then went to the bathroom and emerged a while later to find that she had been attacked by an unknown intruder.

It actually beggars belief that anyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size would believe that nonsense.

Mind you, a lot of the haters that were so convinced the verdict would be 'Guilty' were NOT basing their beliefs on evidence, but on their beloved 'body language' and that stupid reverse speech nonsense. Odd how they always prefer psuedo-science to reality.

I was intrigued by some of the logic.

One particularly convoluted bit was: The fast track judgement for Guedes said that three people were involved. So therefore he could not have acted alone. So they need two more perpetrators. Or they need to review his conviction. Hence the pursuit of AK and AS - they needed a conviction in order to keep things nice and tidy.

I regret my knowledge of Italian law is a bit limited, and really only extends to civil law - but the root of the problem in the criminal law is the porosity between the judiciary, the prosecutors and the defence and prosecution lawyers. This opens up almost infinite possibilities for corruption.

Also, you can have a criminal and a civil case running side by side - which is just plain daft. So an accused could be acquited in a criminal trial , but be subject to pay compensation to the victim from the civil case.

Finally, once appointed, a judge or prosecutor CANNOT be removed from office until retirement age, no matter how they behave.

I think 7/10 to the court for drawing a line under this.

This, concerning the original disgrace of a prosecutor, will make your hair curl, Jean-Pierre. Wiki on Mignini:

Allegations of abuse of office[edit]
In 2006, Mignini was charged with abuse of office for allegedly ordering the illegal wiretapping of the phones of various police officers and journalists involved in the Monster of Florence case.[20] In January 2010, a Florence court found him guilty of exceeding the powers of his office but acquitted of the remaining charges.[5] He was given a 16-month suspended sentence. Mignini appealed the conviction, saying "My conscience is clear, I know I did nothing wrong." [22] He remained in office through the appeal process, as Italian law does not consider convictions final until all appeals are exhausted.[23][24] In November 2011, the Court of Appeal in Florence overturned Mignini's conviction for lack of jurisdiction and referred the case to the prosecutor in Turin to decide whether to re-file the charges.[25] According to Rome-based journalist and author Barbie Latza Nadeau, even if Mignini were convicted, offenses such as this are rarely grounds for removing a prosecutor from office.[26]


Astounding.

This article, which is rather heavy going, explains the Italian legal system from the time of the Romans to the present day. Although it claims the fascist laws were repealed I think it more lkikely they were modified in some way. Like J-P, I am not very conversant with Italian legal proceedings, but I do know, as a former prosecutor that, if I had tried the kind of nasty tricks Mignini used in this case, I would have been hauled over the coals and debarred. LL

http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Law508/ItalianLegalHistory.htm

Every single time a criminal case that the media latch onto, combined with corrupt/incompetent/both police and prosecutors playing to the gallery, you can be sure a disaster is in the making.

I am fascinated by the way the lynch-mobbers ALWAYS believe, without question, whatever garbage the dirty cop/prosecutor throws at people - we've seen it time and time again.

It's an odd phenomena, and does rather illustrate how easy it is to manipulate a certain section of society.

Lamplighter wrote:This article, which is rather heavy going, explains the Italian legal system from the time of the Romans to the present day.  Although it claims the fascist laws were repealed I think it more lkikely they were modified in some way.   Like J-P, I am not very conversant with Italian legal proceedings, but I do know, as a former prosecutor that, if I had tried the kind of nasty tricks Mignini used in this case, I would have been hauled over the coals and debarred.    LL

http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Law508/ItalianLegalHistory.htm

As indeed would anyone. The underlying problem, in Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece and indeed any of the relatively new democracies is the law of unintended consquences.

Having suffered under dictatorships, they were determined that the judiciary must be totally independent of government control. So rules were introduced to prevent the government being able to remove judges they did not like. This allowed the creation of monsters like Mignini who can basically do what the hell they want.

To cap it all, anyone who dares to critisise them can be subject to criminal proceedings.

The problem is, I really do not know what the solution is.

bb1 wrote:Every single time a criminal case that the media latch onto, combined with corrupt/incompetent/both police and prosecutors playing to the gallery, you can be sure a disaster is in the making.

I am fascinated by the way the lynch-mobbers ALWAYS believe, without question, whatever garbage the dirty cop/prosecutor throws at people - we've seen it time and time again.

It's an odd phenomena, and does rather illustrate how easy it is to manipulate a certain section of society.

It has always been thus. Maybe voting should be confied to readers of "The Economist" and "Private Eye".

I am only half joking.

The famously-stupid Yoyo:


It's rather ODD she never once asked Police to keep searching for the other killers, not even after her acquittal.

What 'other killers'? There never were any 'other killers'. There was only ever one killer that raped and murdered Meredith, and he is in jail.

Not that he will stay there much longer, thanks to the deal that he got - lying and framing two people to help the useless, corrupt, prosecutor.

Scanning the comments in the papers, it is quite incredibe how many do not apparently realise that Kercher's killer has been convicted and is currently serving 16 years.

I've noticed that as well, J-P. Those doing the most pitchfork-waving seem to have the least grasp on the whole history of the case.

Just seen that the terminally stupid "Hobs" creature has been dabbling in "statement analysis" again.

So certain. So wrong!

xxxxhttp://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6766p240-amanda-knox-retrial-update-trial-to-go-ahead-acquittal-overturned

And of course the equally stupid Bennett is providing the applause!

Morning, J-P, don't you just hate these pretendy experts? When this case first came to light, I was of the opinion that it might probably be a sex romp/party gone horribly wrong. At the time I was busy with other things so didn't take much notice of it until a friend sent me, as she often does, a parcel of books which included 'The Monster of Florence' by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi. The book recounts the authors' personal experiences while investigating the case and their problems of being accused by the Italian criminal justice system. Preston and Spezi are outspoken critics of the tactics and theories pursued by the Italian police and prosecutors in the Monster of Florence case. I was appalled at the antics of the prosecutor and his attempts to try and pin the murders on them. This made me look again at the Knox case and to revise my opinion to one that the killer was the convicted man and that Knox and her boyfriend happened, like Preston and Spezi, to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and their knowing the killer was used to obtain a conviction and plaudits for the gallant prosecutor who proved that it was a concerted murder. Now why does that remind me of another case, though not of murder? LL

Lamplighter wrote:Morning, J-P, don't you just hate these pretendy experts?    When this case first came to light, I was of the opinion that it might probably be a sex romp/party gone horribly wrong.    At the time I was busy with other things so didn't take much notice of it until a friend sent me, as she often does, a parcel of books which included 'The Monster of Florence' by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi.    The book recounts the authors' personal experiences while investigating the case and their problems of being accused by the Italian criminal justice system. Preston and Spezi are outspoken critics of the tactics and theories pursued by the Italian police and prosecutors in the Monster of Florence case. I was appalled at the antics of the prosecutor and his attempts to try and pin the murders on them.    This made me look again at the Knox case and to revise my opinion to one that the killer was the convicted man and that Knox and her boyfriend happened, like Preston and Spezi, to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and their knowing the killer was used to obtain a conviction and plaudits for the gallant prosecutor who proved that it was a concerted murder.    Now why does that remind me of another case, though not of murder?    LL

Thank you LL. I have to say I only really became aware of the intricacies of the case following the Pam Brown book - here mate is a solicitor who got involved with this.

It is intriguing the way that some people focus only on those things which support their view, and manage to tune out the rest. Which seems to me to a route to madness.

BC Radio 4 articlde on the case.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05nxn0d

Sadly, Auntie is letting her bias show.

Some fascinating material and links on Myths:

http://www.stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=148&t=7595&start=25


Re: Amanda Knox murder conviction overturned

The more you read about the case, the more incredible it is.

And chilling parallels with the Cipriana case. And the McCanns, come to that. Concentration on the female "suspect" for one.

Yes. Burn the witch!

Italy's top criminal court has blamed prosecutors for presenting a flawed and hastily constructed case against Amanda Knox and her former Italian boyfriend.
It reveals the court threw out their convictions for the 2007 murder of her British roommate in part because there was no proof they were at the crime scene.
The Court of Cassation issued its formal written explanation, as required by Italian law, for its March ruling vindicating the pair once accused of murdering Meredith Kercher, in the apartment in Italy.
The court wrote there was an 'absolute lack of biological traces' of Knox, or co-defendant Raffaele Sollecito in the room or on the victim's body.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3225375/Amanda-Knox-cleared-Meredith-Kercher-s-murder-no-evidence-murder-scene-reveals-scathing-Italian-court-report-blaming-prosecutors-frantic-guilty-party.html#ixzz3lAp31ijC
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

A perfect example of the damage publicity-seeking prosecutors do. I wonder how he feels, knowing the wretch that undeniably did kill Miss Kercher was given a lighter sentence in returning for inventing 'evidence'?

I wonder indeed or did he just shrug it off.