Amanda Knox....Innocent American on trial in Italy or cold-blooded murderer?
There is a lot of speculation about whenther Amanda Knox is innocent or guilty. She is on trial for her life and the co
This is drivel. The committee of Council of Europe foreign ministers is not a judicial appeal body. There has been no 'reconviction', since Knox's slander conviction has never been overturned by any appeal court -- instead it was reconfirmed by the Court of Cassation in January, notwithstanding the police failures noted by the ECHR. In other words Knox gained a further appeal t
First of all, you are correct to say that it's not a judicial appeal body, but it is a judicial body dealing with international human rights. Amanda's slander conviction was certainly overturned by the Supreme Court, as indicated in the link, "resulting from a violation established by the European Court of Human Rights". If the conviction hadn't been overturned, there would be no further proceedings.
https://www.ansa.it/umbria/notizie/2024/...
Amanda stood trial again in Florence, where the use of the first memoriale allowed the Florence appeal court to reconvict Amanda of slander. The reconviction was upheld by the Italian Supreme Court. Italy must now submit an action plan or report to the CM for its consideration to evaluate whether the violations have been redressed or not. According to the link "bilateral contacts are ongoing to obtain the submission of an action plan or report."
https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng#{%22execidentifier%22:[%22004-52517%22]}
This confirms that the proceedings are ongoing and the CM have not yet received any action report or plan from Italy. If the CM decides that the violations have been redressed, then the case is closed, and Amanda loses. If the CM decides that the violations have not been redressed, then Italy must find another solution to remedy the violations. An ECHR judgment is binding on the member state.
As I understand it, Amanda must communicate with the ECHR if she wants them to evaluate whether the use of the memoriale represents further violations or not. The 4-month timescale you refer to starts with the receipt of the motivation report by Amanda's defence team. I've been reliably informed that Amanda's legal team are currently in communication with the ECHR.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UybuIA5...
https://rm.coe.int/guide-drafting-action....
Just viewed this post and this is why I have this groupie on ignore. Italy already addressed it via giving her another trial and appeal as well as compensation. The deadline is from cassation's ruling and the motivation report was already made public, this is yet more dishonesty from you. If Knox's defence hasn't bothered reading it that's their problem. Knox as missed her deadline and as has already been explained to you,she'd need to rise new rights violations.The points you raised were already addressed. You're simply repeating yourself as well as being disingenuous. And nobody gaf about your "trust me bro" claim re you being "reliably informed ". Cite your claim or stfu as your mere assertion with nothing to support it won't be entertained. You're extraordinarily dishonest and utterly incapable of having a good faith discussion and clearly get a vicarious thrill out of what Knox did. And you're fooling nobody.
To CV
Just viewed this post and this is why I have this groupie on ignore. Italy already addressed it via giving her another trial and appeal as well as compensation. The deadline is from cassation's ruling and the motivation report was already made public, this is yet more dishonesty from you. If Knox's defence hasn't bothered reading it that's their problem. Knox as missed her deadline and as has already been explained to you,she'd need to rise new rights violations.The points you raised were already addressed. You're simply repeating yourself as well as being disingenuous. And nobody gaf about your "trust me bro" claim re you being "reliably informed ". Cite your claim or stfu as your mere assertion with nothing to support it won't be entertained. You're extraordinarily dishonest and utterly incapable of having a good faith discussion and clearly get a vicarious thrill out of what Knox did. And you're fooling nobody.
First of all there no point in putting me on ignore if I can see your posts, and you are going to respond to my posts anyway. I posted a link to indicate that the current case is ongoing and that the CM are waiting for Italy's action plan or report, and that the proceedings are ongoing. If you are still suggesting that Amanda's defence team has missed any deadlines, then post the relevant link and I'll look at it. Until then, there's no substance in anything you're saying.
Um, you acknowledged there's a deadline yourself but seem to think it doesn't apply to Special Amanda until her defence have the motivational report specifically sent to them😆
It's on the hudoc website, protocol 15. Knox missed the deadline two months ago despite your insistence that Special Amanda doesn't even need to apply because reasons.
Nor has she raised anything new to bring to the ECHR. Go back to your echo chamber on ISF where you and your fellow groupies can insist all is not lost for the chick you really wanna shag. And again if you can't cite your claim other than you've been totally reliably informed (and stuff) then you're laughed at.
This bloke makes 239 look like a paragon of truth.
To CV.
Um, you acknowledged there's a deadline yourself but seem to think it doesn't apply to Special Amanda until her defence have the motivational report specifically sent to them
It's on the hudoc website, protocol 15. Knox missed the deadline two months ago despite your insistence that Special Amanda doesn't even need to apply because reasons.
Nor has she raised anything new to bring to the ECHR. Go back to your echo chamber on ISF where you and your fellow groupies can insist all is not lost for the chick you really wanna shag. And again if you can't cite your claim other than you've been totally reliably informed (and stuff) then you're laughed at.
You and you're stablemate were completely wrong, to an embarrassing degree, about the existing slander conviction not being overturned. It was, in fact, a necessity to do so since the existing conviction was totally undermined by the ECHR judgement, all as indicated in the link provided. It's difficult to give what follows from you or him any credibility after that. If that's the premise that leads you to think that Amanda must make a new application, then you've lost it, or never had it in the first place.
Well, we'll see, won't we?
You and you're stablemate were completely wrong, to an embarrassing degree, about the existing slander conviction not being overturned.
You can't appeal against a conviction that has been overturned, because there's nothing to appeal against. In the Italian civil-law three-tier system, a re-refer back to second-instance appeal court, which happens often, does not mean an overturn or vacation of the kind seen in common-law countries. It just means scope for revision.
And I doubt you can re-apply to the European court for a re-do on the same facts, even if you haven't gone and missed the deadline. That would be judicially futile.
You can't appeal against a conviction that has been overturned, because there's nothing to appeal against. In the Italian civil-law three-tier system, a re-refer back to second-instance appeal court, which happens often, does not mean an overturn or vacation of the kind seen in common-law countries. It just means scope for revision.
I'm not quite sure what planet you're on with this. After Italy overturned the conviction, as they had to, they promptly used the 1st memoriale on its own, as evidence against Amanda.
1. The calunnia conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court due to a binding force judgment from the ECHR that undermined the validity of the original conviction.
2. Amanda was retried on the evidence of the 1st memoriale alone, since the 1.45 statement had to be expunged from the proceedings.
3. The Florence appeal court convicted Amanda on the strength of the memoriale
4. The Supreme Court upheld the reconviction.
5. Italy, as the respondent state, must now go back to the ECHR with an action plan or report in an effort to redress the human rights violations.
That's where we are now. if you look at the current situation, the ECHR are in communication with Italy as the respondent state in bilateral negotiations to come up with an action plan or report to resolve the violations. https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng#{%22execidentifier%22:[%22004-52517%22]}
And I doubt you can re-apply to the European court for a re-do on the same facts, even if you haven't gone and missed the deadline. That would be judicially futile.
6. There is NO RE-DO since the Knox v Italy case is ongoing, and Italy, as the respondent state, hasn't as yet offered an action plan that resolves the ongoing human rights violations.
Amanda may opt to reapply to the ECHR to have the reconviction evaluated as further human rights abuses, in addition to the existing Knox v Italy, but it may not be needed, since the use of the memoriale as a means to reconvict Amanda may well be insufficient in remedying the existing violations.
You need to forget Italian domestic law and recognise that it's not those legal considerations that have the clout. It's the ECHR human rights laws that hold sway with legal binding force according to European law. Look at the YouTube video for a better understanding of the ongoing proceedings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UybuIA5...
https://rm.coe.int/guide-drafting-ac...i....
Yes! I agree at last. Let things run their course, and take it as it comes. If you are going to monitor the case, you have to keep your eye on this link for updates.
https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/#{%22fulltext%22:[%22knox%22],%22execidentifier%22:[%22004-52517%22]}
You can't appeal against a conviction that has been overturned, because there's nothing to appeal against. In the Italian civil-law three-tier system, a re-refer back to second-instance appeal court, which happens often, does not mean an overturn or vacation of the kind seen in common-law countries. It just means scope for revision.And I doubt you can re-apply to the European c
Now now, he's been reliably informed!
To CV
Now now, he's been reliably informed!
There's nothing reliable about your or 57 on Red's spliff-addled interpretation of the current Knox v Italy case proceedings. I've just answered his concerns on the previous page; perhaps you missed them.
I’d bet a large sum that 57 isn’t a reefer man. Also that you have a large collection of Knox pics.
I’d bet a large sum that 57 isn’t a reefer man. Also that you have a large collection of Knox pics.
If I was a weed man, I wouldn't even remember this convo, as it blocks memories, just like it did for Innocent Amanda's that night and that other guy her groupies ultimately don't care about.
To CV
If I was a weed man, I wouldn't even remember this convo, as it blocks memories, just like it did for Innocent Amanda's that night and that other guy her groupies ultimately don't care about.
Given up on the ECHR, have we? Let me lead you right back to it.
What would it matter if it does or not, since all of the proceedings before the writing of the 1st memoriale are expunged from the record, including the 1.45 in addition to the 5.45 statements, which are no longer admissible due to gross human rights abuses. The memoriale that was spitefully used against Amanda was also tainted with human rights abuses, yet deemed to be a retraction by the ECHR. It didn't stop the Italian courts from claiming that it was a reiteration of calunnia and used it to uphold her conviction.
It all has to go past the ECHR committee of ministers in the form of an action plan to remedy all of the human rights abuses Italy is accused of. That's the only thing that is active and worth discussing; anything else is redundant and a waste of keystrokes. Your boat has sailed on everything else; it's not coming back for you.
Here's the relevant article that allowed Italy as the respondent state to overturn the Chieffi calunnia conviction.
Art. 628-bis. Request for the elimination of the prejudicial effects of decisions adopted in violation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or the Additional Protocols thereto
1. The convicted person and the person subject to a detention measure may request the Court of Cassation to revoke the criminal sentence or the criminal decree of conviction pronounced against them, to order the reopening of the proceedings or, in any case, to adopt the measures necessary to eliminate the prejudicial effects resulting from the violation established by the European Court of Human Rights, when they have filed an application for the determination of a violation of the rights recognized by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or the Additional Protocols to the Convention and the European Court has upheld the application with a final decision, or has ordered the removal of the application from the register pursuant to Article 37 of the Convention following the unilateral recognition of the violation by the State.
Source: https://www.altalex.com/documents/n...ec...
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
TomG
Posts: 618
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Scotland
Re: Amanda Knox Case Public Discussion Forum 2-8-2011
Postby TomG » Mon Sep 14, 2015 4:25 am
True to form the Kercher’s don’t want Amanda near Meredith’s grave, but the Daily Mail said this -
“Stephanie Kercher said the family found it ‘incredibly difficult’ to understand how the Italian justice system had failed to give them answers”.
Wouldn’t it be more advisable to pursue these answers from renewed sources rather than ban Amanda from the graveside. On two occasions a guilty verdict was overturned by a higher court so they can have no quibble over the final acquittal, therefore they have no moral high ground in banning Amanda on any matter of being “disrespectful and unacceptable”.
The Kercher’s have moaned for years about not knowing what happened that night, yet it seems that they can’t lift a finger for themselves to try to find out. John Kercher mentioned TJMK in his book,why didn’t the well-informed lawyers of TJMK keep them briefed of affairs?
So there is no other reason to ban Amanda other than a self-righteous and stubborn need to remain steeped in ignorance in order to sustain that moral high ground as far as I can see.
The DM also quotes Stephanie as saying –
“She said there were still doubts over what happened that night as the judges said that Knox and Sollecito were present at the house but not at the scene of the crime”.
If the recent motivation report has re-written Amanda and Raffaele’s presence at the house please let me know.
Hoots.
Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what your country can do for Amanda and Raffaele.
User avatar
TomG
Posts: 618
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Scotland
This is why this pos is on ignore. Utterly despicable attack on an innocent family.
He's Scottish too? I assumed he was an American patriotically cheering on his girl murderer.
^
this was a key part that made the internet saying adnad syned or whatever his name is to say he might be not guilty to..oh ****, actually we ****ed up, he is most likely guilty
can't believe there are still people in here who think Knox did it lol....idiots.
New doc - Knox goes back to Italy to confront the moronic, incompetent prosecutor.
Broken YouTube Link
can't believe there are still people in here who think Knox did it lol....idiots.New doc - Knox goes back to Italy to confront the moronic, incompetent prosecutor.
Ah oh...you've summoned the King of the idiots, expect his appearance at any moment...
can't believe there are still people in here who think Knox did it lol....idiots.New doc - Knox goes back to Italy to confront the moronic, incompetent prosecutor.
LMAO
would love to see an actual civil discussion between them with him saying what evidence was
or should have had henry vs her.
very surprised shes doing this tho a few years ago she said she would never go back to italy again.
also nobody ever answers my cell phone question pings.
isnt that how ayad assen or whatever his name is when from everyone saying he was not guily to..oh **** hes actually guilty as **** and got away with it ??
not saying its relevant to the case but pings can help
