Tuesday, June 01, 2010

Knox Hearing On Calunnia Charges Technicality, Then Trial Set To Be Under Way June 16

Posted by Peter Quennell

[click for larger image]

Nick Squires in Rome for the Daily Telegraph has the report which includes this.

Knox’s lawyer, Luciano Ghirga, argued that it was inappropriate for the slander charge to be heard by judge Claudia Matteini, because she had been involved in one of the preliminary hearings into the Kercher murder.

The case on Tuesday was adjourned until June 17, when another judge is likely to be assigned to the case.  The trial is likely to start on October 1. Her appeal is also expected to start in the autumn, meaning that the two cases could run concurrently.

If Knox is found guilty of slander, she could face another six years in jail, on top of the 26 years she is currently serving.

And Knox could face MORE time than 26 plus six years if the prosecution wins it on appeal. Possibly a total of forty.

So much for the PR campaign and the ongoing misinterpretation of the evidence and sliming of the prosecution by the “pro-Knox” websites. Guede of course ran no campaign, his lawyers and friends were always respectful, he took the short-form trial (an admission of some kind of guilt), and he tried some sort of apology to Meredith’s family.

And after his first appeal he emerged with only 16 years.


Doen’t it seem long overdue for Ted Simon and David Marriot to put a clamp on all of the libelous sliming and all of the lunatic evidence misinterpretation?

At least in the case of Ted Simon, isn’t that meant to be his role? Would some real journalist or TV reporter please ASK him?!

Given the ENORMOUS harm all this is doing to the best interests of Amanda Knox and her besieged lawyers (who despise it), it beats us why they did not act MONTHS ago to close down the festering xenophobic websites.

Way to shoot yourself in both feet. And in the thinking organ too, it seems…

Posted by Peter Quennell on 06/01/10 at 04:34 PM | #

I’m glad that Amanda Knox has Mr. Ghirga and Mr. della Vedova as her defence team.  Excellent, well-respected lawyers who work hard for their client and who also do an excellent job of focussing on the job in hand and not being distracted by other “goings on”.

I have read that Mr. Ghirga spoke to Mr. Mignini about the “noise” coming from certain groups in the US during Knox’s trial for murder, and I am sure his displeasure hasn’t gone away - but, for justice’s sake Amanda Knox must have a good defence team, and their resiliance in the face of everything that makes their job harder shows how good they are. 

I believe the murder trial was fair and balanced and I believe both the slander trial and the appeal will also be fair and balanced.  Those who choose to make “noise” and attempt to influence people’s thinking through the media and websites etc will not change what happens in the court room, and I feel sorry for those who seem to believe that it will.

Posted by Nolongeramember on 06/01/10 at 04:59 PM | #

Nice to see Knox has (apparently) learned to stop beaming at the cameras everytime she arrives in court.

Posted by Janus on 06/01/10 at 05:45 PM | #

Either she is genuinely more subdued as reality has started to bite, or someone has got hold of her and given her a metaphorical shaking in order to stop the grinning.

Anything calculated to be less sympathy inducing I cannot imagine - sniggering through your trial for murder like a child of five who understands nothing and has no respect.

Thank goodness. Glad to see that madam has shown a little decorum finally. Perhaps the first little sniff of her 26 years sentence has had the required effect after all. Who knows, in ten, fifteen years she may even feel like telling the truth. Let’s see shall we?

Incidently, Peter I agree about the ‘justice’ sites. Amanda’s little band of middle-aged male ‘admirers’ are doing her no good. Gives me the creeps that her parents permit it. What kind of family does this make them appear? Um..careless?

Posted by TT on 06/01/10 at 08:19 PM | #

I agree totally with everything you have all said above. As far as I can understand AK said in court

“I didn’t want to accuse anyone. I only described how things went. Why are they continuing to accuse me over statements that I have always made?”

I don’t know how that sounds to everyone else, but if I was in a situation where I had been beaten by a police officer, as AK claims she was, I would not be ” apologizing ” for accusing my attacker. I would simply say ” They/he/she did hit me ” - end of story. I would be forthright in my own defense, and secure in the knowledge that I am telling the truth.

To me AKs statement above rings very hollow for want of a better expression, and doesn’t sound at all convincing that she is telling the truth.

Posted by Paddy5000 on 06/01/10 at 09:11 PM | #

Wow, what a different photo this is from all the others!

This is the first picture that makes me feel a little bit sorry for Amanda Knox. I think she has finally realized that people know she is guilty and she won’t be getting away with the horrible crime that she committed. It is probably very painful to come to this realization.

She looks like a broken woman.

Of course, I feel much more sorry for Meredith Kercher.

Posted by devorah on 06/01/10 at 09:36 PM | #

¨Why are they continuing to accuse me over statements that I have always made?¨

What does this mean?

¨continuing¨ ( in the meaning of everlasting? )

¨statements that I have always made¨ (amazed about accused while consequent? ) (kid: when it´s consequent, it´s no lie)

Weird, a (this?) brain . . . .

Posted by Helder Licht on 06/01/10 at 10:43 PM | #

Don’t be fooled by that picture…Here’s one from the same day with her smiling as usual.


Posted by chira385 on 06/02/10 at 01:43 AM | #

just looked at photo that chira385 posted…Seems her lawyers might of had a long talk to her about how to look and act in the court room vs how she acted through the murder trial.

What I can’t get over is she made these accusations but can’t remember what the officer looked like that did it. If an officer of any law was to hit and keep hitting me in the back of the head and calling me stupid not only would I remember what they looked like but what their name was.

But seems like AK has forgot what happened from Nov 1 on until after the court except being hit.
I really believe shes scared to say anything more cause on this subject she isn’t sure what she has said and hasn’t said with all her lies.

But what I am wondering about is her parents are on trial for slandering also I think on June 6th their court date is…if found guilty will they also get 6 yrs?.. Poor Italy might get the whole Knox clan before its over.

Posted by jasmine1998 on 06/02/10 at 02:13 AM | #

This is the article of the Penal Code applicable to Amanda:

Article 368.
Anyone who, with a complaint, demand or request directed to a judicial authority or another authority that has the obligation to report it, even if made anonymously or under a false name, blames a crime on someone that he/she knows innocent, or anyone who simulates against her/him the traces of a crime, shall be punished with imprisonment from two to six years.

The penalty is increased if someone blames anybody of a crime for which the law establishes prison sentences up to a maximum of ten years, or other more serious penalty.

The prison sentence is from four to twelve years, if from the accused crime the falsely accused person receives a sentence of imprisonment exceeding five years; the sentence is from six to twenty years, if the falsely accused person received a life sentence; the life sentence is applied if from the false accusation the falsely accused person receives a condemnation to the death penalty (1).
(1) The death penalty for crimes under the Criminal Code was abolished art. 1 of D.Lgs.Lgt. August 10, 1944, No 224.

This is applicable to the Knox parents:

Art. 595.

Anyone who, outside of the cases mentioned in the previous article, while communicating with several people, damages the reputation of others shall be punished with imprisonment up to one year or a fine up to Euro 1032.

If the offense consists in the attribution of a determined fact, the penalty is imprisonment up to two years or fine of up to Euro 2065.

If the offense is caused though the press or any other means of publicity, or in a public act, the punishment shall be imprisonment from six months to three years or a fine of not less than Euro 516.

If the offense is caused to a political, administrative or judicial body, or to one of its representatives or to a collegial authority, the penalties are increased.

Posted by Commissario Montalbano on 06/02/10 at 02:44 AM | #

Thank you for sharing the penal code on Slander Commissario Montalbano.

Posted by jasmine1998 on 06/02/10 at 07:07 AM | #

Can someone give some long time effect scenarios when having both parents in prison for let´s say a couple of years?

All I foresee is a mess . . . .

Posted by Helder Licht on 06/02/10 at 02:53 PM | #

These crimes will not result in long prison sentences.

The crime of slander against Lumumba resulted only in 1 year of prison (which is even less than the statutory minimum of 2 due to the application of generic attenuating circumstances).

A crime of defamation, even if perpetrated through the press, will likely result in a fine only.

Don’t forget that sentences under 2 years of prison, if perpetrated by first time offenders, automatically receive a “conditional suspension” (similar to Mignini’s conviction). Therefore Amanda’s parents will not serve any time in prison.

Posted by Commissario Montalbano on 06/02/10 at 10:25 PM | #

I am sure Ak’s parents’ trial will be put off also and I agree this is a mess. One thing I can’t figure out is how AK’s mom knowingly didn’t do anything in the arrest of Lumumba and let him sit in jail, even though AK had told her what she did.This whole family seems really out in the “Left Field”. Everything is about them and only them.

I feel she should get time for conspiracy.

Posted by jasmine1998 on 06/02/10 at 11:02 PM | #

‘Foxy Knoxy is innocent, my brother killed Meredith’

Posted by pensky on 06/09/10 at 04:46 PM | #

Hi Penksky. Alessi Part Deux.

The defenses propose to use this “witness” in their appeal?! Things must be further down the tubes for them than even we thought.

The brother in prison might have the last laugh. Like Alessi, this claimant must testify under oath - and face serious jail time if he is proved to have been lying.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 06/09/10 at 04:55 PM | #

It seems that this “new” witness is not that new, and that he also claimed to have been the one entering twice the house in Via della pergola after it was closed. If I did understand correctly. He also accused himself for a crime he did not commit in exchange for money, long ago.

He is not the most convincing witness, and yes, thay have to be desperate to rely on that!

Posted by Patou on 06/09/10 at 08:59 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Calunnia Claims At The Core Of The Problem For Amanda Knox - And Her Parents

Or to previous entry Questions For Knox And Sollecito: Ten From Daily Beast As Knox Calunnia #2 Trial Starts