first trial transcript translations?

first trial transcript translations?

Postby kindlekitten » Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:20 am

I thought at one point we had them somewhere. I looked through the "documents" section and didn't find them. I am currently in an on line discussion(argument) with a guilter who is liberally linking to and quoting from liberally and loosely translated trial transcripts.
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:25 am

Unfortunately, no. There have been several posted here, mostly Google translations, no full human translations that I am aware of. Most recently the transcript containing Anna Donnino's testimony on the Maths on Trial thread, one containing the fingerprint expert's testimony on the Rudy thread and another containing the defenses oral arguments to void the trial due to discovery issues on the Public thread. There have been a few more posted at JREF and Websleuths, but most of the transcripts have not been published, nor human translated. The PGPs are fond of quoting Massei who quotes cherry picked sections from the transcripts which include page numbers, etc.

I have made several recent appeals for all the transcripts as I believe now is an appropriate time to restart this project but I have not had any success to this point.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MichaelB » Mon Apr 01, 2013 5:17 am

RoseMontague wrote:Unfortunately, no. There have been several posted here, mostly Google translations, no full human translations that I am aware of. Most recently the transcript containing Anna Donnino's testimony on the Maths on Trial thread, one containing the fingerprint expert's testimony on the Rudy thread and another containing the defenses oral arguments to void the trial due to discovery issues on the Public thread. There have been a few more posted at JREF and Websleuths, but most of the transcripts have not been published, nor human translated. The PGPs are fond of quoting Massei who quotes cherry picked sections from the transcripts which include page numbers, etc.

I have made several recent appeals for all the transcripts as I believe now is an appropriate time to restart this project but I have not had any success to this point.


It'd be good to get some of the witness statements as well.
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6171
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Clive Wismayer » Mon Apr 01, 2013 5:19 am

RoseMontague wrote:Unfortunately, no. There have been several posted here, mostly Google translations, no full human translations that I am aware of. Most recently the transcript containing Anna Donnino's testimony on the Maths on Trial thread, one containing the fingerprint expert's testimony on the Rudy thread and another containing the defenses oral arguments to void the trial due to discovery issues on the Public thread. There have been a few more posted at JREF and Websleuths, but most of the transcripts have not been published, nor human translated. The PGPs are fond of quoting Massei who quotes cherry picked sections from the transcripts which include page numbers, etc.

I have made several recent appeals for all the transcripts as I believe now is an appropriate time to restart this project but I have not had any success to this point.

Anyone reading here who has access to the transcripts, direct or indirect, should try to get them circulated. Amanda and Raffaele can only benefit. We might find something useful in them.
Sample 36B: not blood, not human and not a sample (no cytology!!). Sample 36I: Amanda's LCN profile, ergo the knife is the murder weapon. :boggled:
When do we get the fibre analysis results?
Clive Wismayer
 
Posts: 13800
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:40 am
Location: Surrey, England

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Mon Apr 01, 2013 5:52 am

Clive Wismayer wrote:
RoseMontague wrote:Unfortunately, no. There have been several posted here, mostly Google translations, no full human translations that I am aware of. Most recently the transcript containing Anna Donnino's testimony on the Maths on Trial thread, one containing the fingerprint expert's testimony on the Rudy thread and another containing the defenses oral arguments to void the trial due to discovery issues on the Public thread. There have been a few more posted at JREF and Websleuths, but most of the transcripts have not been published, nor human translated. The PGPs are fond of quoting Massei who quotes cherry picked sections from the transcripts which include page numbers, etc.

I have made several recent appeals for all the transcripts as I believe now is an appropriate time to restart this project but I have not had any success to this point.

Anyone reading here who has access to the transcripts, direct or indirect, should try to get them circulated. Amanda and Raffaele can only benefit. We might find something useful in them.

These are the transcripts, that I know of:
2009-03-13 Testimony of
- BARBADORI MAURO
- MOSCATELLI DANIELE
- D’ASTOLTO FABIO
- COLANTONE AIDA
- DONNINO ANNA
- VOLTURNO ORESTE

2009-04-23 Testimony of
- INTINI ALBERTO
- CANTAGALLI CLAUDIO
- BROCCI GIOIA
- GIUNTA AGATINO
- FRANCAVIGLIA ANTONINO

2009-05-22 Testimony of
- Stefanoni Patrizia

2009-05-23 Testimony of
- Stefanoni Patrizia
- Camana Francesco

2009-07-06 Testimony of
- Torre Carlo
- Gino Sarah

2009-07-18 Testimony of
- Khiri Hicham
- Tagliabracci Adriano

2009-09-14 Testimony of
- Tagliabracci Adriano

2009-09-25 Testimony of
- Caltagirone Carlo
- Patumi Walter

From the appeal:
2011-06-27 Testimony of
- Guede Rudy
- Benedetti Giacomo
- Zaccaro Cosimo
- Ilic Alexander
- Chiacchiera Marco
- Napoleoni Monica
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 6:35 am

Nice, even organized. I believe that is all I have seen as well.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby kindlekitten » Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:02 am

Do you have links to those Hans?
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:55 am

13 March 2009, orig and Google (2 parts)
13march2009.pdf
13march2009 part 1 Google.pdf
13march2009part 2 Google.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:59 am

23 April 2009 orig and Google
Trascrizione 23 04 2009 (OCR).pdf
Google Trascrizione 23 04 2009.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:04 am

22 May 2009 orig and Google
5_Assise_trascrizioni_22 maggio 2009.doc
google trans5_Assise_trascrizioni_22 maggio 2009.doc
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:07 am

23 May orig and Google
5_assise_trascrizioni_23 maggio 2009_ completa.doc
google trans 5 assie 23 may pdf.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:10 am

6 July orig and google
6 luglio 2009.doc
Google 6 July doc.doc
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:13 am

18 julIy orig and google
7_Assise_trascrizioni_18 luglio 2009.doc


I cant seem to find the Google of this one at present.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:15 am

14 sept orig and google
9_Assise_trascrizioni_14 settembre 2009.pdf
google assie 14 Sept.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:18 am

25 sept orig and google
9_ assise_trascrizioni_25 settembre 2009.doc
Google 25 September doc.doc
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:23 am

Hans do you have the 18 July Google translation, I can't locate it?
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby komponisto » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:33 am

Please, let's just have all of it! Both trials, and preferably the preliminary hearings too. All transcripts, all briefs, all expert reports, all other submissions! No more selectivity, secret-sources-out-there! (If Barbie Nitwit Nadeau can see all 10,000-pages-or-whatever of the casefile, why in Cthulhu's name can't I?) I'm happy to start a project to human-translate everything. We sure as hell have time now, lol.
komponisto
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:15 am

RoseMontague wrote:Hans do you have the 18 July Google translation, I can't locate it?
I'm looking, but I can't find it either. :Asche auf mein Haupt:
Maybe this would be the place for Prof. Potenza's two reports and Prof. Torricelli's Considerazioni. :winks:
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:19 am

A bit about the Matteini hearing:
Matteini Hearing.pdf

Matteini Hearing (Italian OCR).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby LarryK » Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:19 am

I downloaded Amanda's testimony of June 12, 2009 from PMF a year ago. I don't know if it's still available.
The brain is not configured in a way that makes obedience through logical, language-based propositions possible during distress and suffering. -- James Wilder, "Neurotheology and the Life Model"
LarryK
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 9:57 pm

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:15 am

komponisto wrote:Please, let's just have all of it! Both trials, and preferably the preliminary hearings too. All transcripts, all briefs, all expert reports, all other submissions! No more selectivity, secret-sources-out-there! (If Barbie Nitwit Nadeau can see all 10,000-pages-or-whatever of the casefile, why in Cthulhu's name can't I?) I'm happy to start a project to human-translate everything. We sure as hell have time now, lol.


Yes. I agree. It's time.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:23 am

Hans wrote:
RoseMontague wrote:Hans do you have the 18 July Google translation, I can't locate it?
I'm looking, but I can't find it either. :Asche auf mein Haupt:
Maybe this would be the place for Prof. Potenza's two reports and Prof. Torricelli's Considerazioni. :winks:


Yes, please post them when you get a chance.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:26 am

SALs and Quantifications
SAL.pdf
Quantificazione.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:57 am

Prof. Torricelli - Considerazioni Omicidio Meredith Kercher (05 Giugnio 2009)
CONSIDERAZIONI DOTTORESSA TORRICELLI.pdf

2009-06-05 - Prof. Torricelli - Considerazioni (OCR).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:03 am

Prof. Potenza - Note preliminari per la difesa del Sig. Raffaele Sollecito (28 Novembre 2007)
Doc_SollecitoPERIZIAPotenza1.pdf

2007-11-28 - Prof. Potenza - Note preliminari (OCR).pdf

2007-11-28 - Prof. Potenza - Note preliminari (google translation of OCR).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:06 am

Prof. Potenza - Ulteriori brevi note per la difesa di Raffaele Sollecito (03 Gennaio 2008)
Doc_SollecitoPERIZIAPotenza2.pdf

2008-01-03 - Prof. Potenza - Ulteriori brevi note (OCR).pdf

2008-01-03 - Prof. Potenza - Ulteriori brevi note (google translation of OCR).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:10 am

LarryK wrote:I downloaded Amanda's testimony of June 12, 2009 from PMF a year ago. I don't know if it's still available.
It is: AMANDA KNOX TRIAL TESTIMONY: EDITED
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:58 pm

Just a suggestion, maybe this thread should be moved to the "Documents" sectiton, after the newspaper articles and interview transcripts there have been moved to the matching sections. I think there should be a "Crime Scene Fotographs" thread there, starting with the spheron-fotos Rose posted on the "What happened to Meredith Kercher" thread. I don't know about how much can be uploaded to the server here, but I think these parts of the evidence should be stored here at IA permanently. :twocents:
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:15 pm

Nice work you guys. :)
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Thu Apr 04, 2013 11:40 am

The prosecutions appeal against judge Massei's verdict:
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Appello_Mignini_Comodi_15.4.2010.pdf

2010-04-13 - Mignini-Comodi Appeal (OCR).pdf

2010-04-13 - Mignini-Comodi Appeal (OCR)(google translation).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:25 pm

Another one from the appeal:
2011-07-25 - Testimony of
- Prof. Stefano Conti e Prof.ssa Carla Vecchiotti
2011-07-25 - Conti - Vecchiotti transcript (Italian).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby acbytesla » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:13 am

Any possibility on Dr. Pellero's report or the Scientific Police report on the cell phone stuff? I don't speak Italian but I do speak data communications. That's the stuff I want to see. (Don't want to sound selfish but it is where I think I can do the most good.) So if you great people see it, please PM me.

Thanks AC
acbytesla
 
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 2:46 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Katody » Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:07 am

What about 2009-04-03 Diya Lumumba?
Katody
 
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:31 pm

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:44 am

Katody wrote:What about 2009-04-03 Diya Lumumba?

I don't have that one, or the flat mates or the 7 virgins or quint and Toto. There are more we dont have than what we do at this point.

I did complete the 18 July translation (Google) attached. This is what led to the court ordering the addition data that was finally provided to the defense on 30 July. Testimony of Torre and Gino.
Google 7_Assise_trascrizioni_18 luglio 2009.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:06 am

Sorry this is testimony of - Khiri Hicham
- Tagliabracci Adriano
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MichaelB » Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:28 am

RoseMontague wrote:Sorry this is testimony of - Khiri Hicham
- Tagliabracci Adriano


Hicham doesn't offer much other than the cops knocked on his door at 2am for a little q&a and he was parked outside the cottage for a few minutes after midnight the night of the murder. He knew Meredith through Sophie who he'd made out with. According to Follain, she was naming him as possibly being the killer :::lol::: :::eek::: . He'd never been to the cottage, didn't know the guys downstairs, didn't know Raffaele and only knew Guede by sight. He'd lived in Perugia for 12 years.
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6171
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Wed Apr 10, 2013 9:17 am

RoseMontague wrote:
Katody wrote:What about 2009-04-03 Diya Lumumba?

I don't have that one, or the flat mates or the 7 virgins or quint and Toto. There are more we dont have than what we do at this point.

I did complete the 18 July translation (Google) attached. This is what led to the court ordering the addition data that was finally provided to the defense on 30 July. Testimony of Torre and Gino.
Google 7_Assise_trascrizioni_18 luglio 2009.pdf


Rats, all the good stuff.
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:34 pm

Since there are problems with the attachments, why not use this until the problem is fixed: ;-)
Today over at PMF.org:
Iodine wrote:Hey, Brmull -- this is PR from 2+2.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/opsuu757ns0tdes/rQxtsopej- everything we could access from IIP; we don't know if there's more, but this is what we could shame them into giving up. The blue Download button at the upper right will download the entire library, or you can download individually by clicking on the file names.

All: Pleased to make your acquaintance.
Btw, the comment from Poker Reference/Iodine is priceless... :lol:
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Thu Apr 18, 2013 4:44 pm

Hans wrote:Since there are problems with the attachments, why not use this until the problem is fixed: ;-)
Today over at PMF.org:
Iodine wrote:Hey, Brmull -- this is PR from 2+2.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/opsuu757ns0tdes/rQxtsopej- everything we could access from IIP; we don't know if there's more, but this is what we could shame them into giving up. The blue Download button at the upper right will download the entire library, or you can download individually by clicking on the file names.

All: Pleased to make your acquaintance.
Btw, the comment from Poker Reference/Iodine is priceless... :lol:


Such silliness. Need to get the documents thing fixed here, however.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Apr 19, 2013 1:14 am

Thanks for fixing the pdf issues.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Fri Apr 26, 2013 2:43 pm

For the poker guys and gals. A little lazy you are not doing the search yourselves, aren't you? :winks: )

Micheli (with names)
Micheli_Report.pdf


Hellmann:
Hellmann(ocr).doc

Hellmann(ocr).pdf


Francesco Maresca's Ricorso:
Cassation-Ricorso-Kercher.pdf (OCR).doc

Cassation-Ricorso-Kercher.pdf (OCR).pdf


:coke:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Fri Apr 26, 2013 4:46 pm

Hans wrote:For the poker guys and gals. A little lazy you are not doing the search yourselves, aren't you? :winks: )

Micheli (with names)
Micheli_Report.pdf


Hellmann:
Hellmann(ocr).doc

Hellmann(ocr).pdf


Francesco Maresca's Ricorso:
Cassation-Ricorso-Kercher.pdf (OCR).doc

Cassation-Ricorso-Kercher.pdf (OCR).pdf


:coke:


Thanks :wave:
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby kindlekitten » Fri Apr 26, 2013 4:47 pm

danke :worthy:
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Apr 27, 2013 10:24 am

Micheli Google translation.pdf
Google translation of Micheli
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MichaelB » Sat May 18, 2013 8:15 am

From Catnip PMF

Transcripts Donnino

Court hearing 13 March 2009 transcript, pp 135-176:

[135]
Depositions of the witness Anna Donnino

The witness, admonished under Article 497 Criminal Procedure Code, reads the affirmation.

Generalities: Anna Donnino, born at Viterbo on 17 September 1962.

President: Proceed, Mr Prosecutor.

Public Prosecutor (Dr Mignini)

Question: What work do you do?
Answer: I am the translation/interpretation reviser at the Perugia Police Station.

Q: For how long?
A: For more than 22 years.

Q: Have you undertaken work in your field of expertise in the investigation into the death of Meredith Kercher?
A: Absolutely yes. I have assisted various persons in the course of declarations and I have translated much written material, as well as having provided transcriptions of various recordings.

Q: You were present during the interview of Amanda Knox on the night of the 5 and 6 November?
A: Yes.

Q: Tell us what happened, when she arrived and what happened, except only, obviously, the declarations, which are not allowed to be reported.
A: I remember having received a telephone call from Assistant Lorena Zugarini, the precise hour exactly I’m not able to say, though orientation-wise it would have had to have been before 23:30 because I was already in [136] bed and at the latest I go to bed more or less a little before that time. I had received this call and Assistant Zugarini had told me that I had to come into the Station because my expertise was required. And that’s what I did, I dressed myself and I went to the Station. You have to take into consideration that I don’t live in Perugia, I live outside, I’m about 40 km away, in the environs of Castiglione del Lago, so I didn’t immediately turn up at the Station, I would have taken around three quarters of an hour, however I believe to have gotten there no later than half past midnight and at that point I had started to carry out my work.

Q: At that point you had arrived and had commenced carrying your work of interpreting in the Amanda Knox interview?
A: Exactly.

Q: Do you remember how Amanda was? How was her behaviour? Then later we’ll get more into the specifics.
A: I had been made to enter a room where in fact there was Inspector Ficarra at a small table, another colleague from SCO, I only remember his first name, he was called Ivano, a police officer, and there was Miss Knox seated, I seated myself beside her, I introduced myself, I had said that I was an interpreter and I was there to assist her , to help her understand and initially I saw that she was sufficiently calm, she was answering the questions that were being put to her.

Q: There was at a certain point a change in her behaviour?
A: Yes.

Q: In particular at what moment?
A: This moment I recall it especially clearly, it was really stamped in my mind, there was a moment in which Miss Knox was asked how come she had not gone to work and she replied that she had received [137] a message from Mr Patrick Lumumba in which Mr Lumumba communicated to her…
Defence (Ghirga): This is…
President: Yes, if we may, perhaps these are not going to be admissible. This change, at what moment did it happen, and in what did it consist of?
A: The change had occurred right after this message, in the sense that the signorina said she hadn’t replied to the message from Patrick, when instead her reply message was shown to her she had a true and proper emotional shock. It’s a thing that has remained very strongly with me because the first thing that she did is that she immediately puts her hands on her ears, making this gesture rolling her head, curving in her shoulders also and saying “It’s him! It’s him! It was him! I can see/hear him or: I know it.[Lo sento]” and so on and so forth.
President: So an attitude…
A: An extremely participative attitude.
President: These hands on the head how did you describe them?
Prosecutor (Mignini): On the head or on the ears?
A: On the ears, sorry, I made the gesture to imitate this gesture that she was making and that she made repeatedly during the course [of the interview].

Q: From that moment onwards?
A: From that moment onwards. Beyond everything else I wanted to add that the whole thing had occurred with an extreme emotional involvement, a thing that I am not going to forget easily. She was crying while she was making these declarations, she was visibly shocked and frightened and exactly because of this enormous emotional involvement we all of us, me especially, had believed them!

Q: At a certain point what had happened? The statement had [138] been finalised?
A: The statement at that point had been… her, what she had been recounting, had been written down, the statement had been interrupted and she had been, if I’m not mistaken, at that point she was asked if she wanted a lawyer.

Q: And what was her response?
A: She had answered no, I remember that she replied with no.

Q: You were present in the succeeding phase, when the writing of the statement was completed Amanda was where? You were still with her, or had you separated?
A: No, I had always stayed in the room, I hadn’t ever left.

Q: And what was she doing? What behaviour was Amanda showing?
A: At the moment there had been this emotional breakdown, she really had also slumped on the chair, we had made her move, we had waited for her to calm herself a little bit and from that moment she had really started to recount, in a, I repeat, rather participative manner, very anxious, very credible.

Q: Was she in the same room or had she been taken outside?
A: Absolutely yes, always inside the same room.

Q: Was there anyone, some police officer who, himself also, was staying there?
A: Yes. I’ll explain Miss Knox was seated at the table, I was on her left and I was translating what she was saying, her questions, her answers, and in front of her there was this… an agent from SCO actually, I remember that he was called Ivano, who through the whole evening had comforted her, had reassured her, I remember perfectly that I was extremely struck by the behaviour of this person, by his humanity [139] and by his patience, he was holding her hands and caressing her exactly because he had noted/realised the particularly prostrate/dejected state of the girl.

Q: How long did this phase last before the other statement came to be made, do you remember?
A: Well a bit of time had passed by.

Q: You remember it… you’ve described it, however I’ll ask it, was she threatened, did she suffer any beatings?
A: Absolutely.

Q: She suffered maltreatments?
A: Absolutely not.

Q: Had types of comfort been offered to her?
A: Well during the evening yes, in the sense that I remember that someone went down to the ground floor, it was the middle of the night, so in the Station at that hour there are those automatic distributors, there’s nothing else, someone went to the ground floor and brought everybody something to drink, some hot drinks and something to eat. I myself had a coffee, so I believe that she also had something.

Q: What happened then?
A: After which she was interviewed by you, sir.

Q: This interview, how did it turn out? Was it a spontaneous declaration?
A: Absolutely yes. She had been asked, it was already deep night, we were all tired enough and she was asked if she wanted to make spontaneous declarations and if she wanted to recount what she could remember, what had happened, she said yes because she also wanted to do this last act before going to bed.

Q: Do you remember the expressions she used when she decided to make these declarations?
A: I remember perfectly this continual gesture of putting her hands on her ears, of shaking her head, [140] saying… she was also saying something as regards Patrick, saying: “It’s him! He’s bad”. I also had the impression from her words that she was afraid of him, she was saying this, and she also said, she also said it to me, that she in the course of the night had made this gesture because she was hiding in the kitchen because she was hearing the screams of the girl, the screams of her…
Defence (Ghirga): Although on the spontaneous declarations I ask that…
President: Look here, on this maybe, you aren’t allowed to refer to this.
A: The signorina had said this even to me, though.
Prosecutor (Mignini): The gesture of putting the hands on the ears alludes… and on the ears and not on the head?
A: Yes, on the ears.

Q: Has it got a meaning?
A: I look…
President: The gesture only, anyone can offer an interpretation of the gesture later.
Prosecutor (Mignini): So then she had decided to make these spontaneous declarations.
A: Yes, spontaneously.

Q: You were present as interpreter?
A: Yes, absolutely yes.

Q: You rendered these declarations, you translated them and how was Amanda when you had rendered these declarations?
A: Let’s say that her response had been very clear.
President: Let’s put that aside...
[140] Prosecutor (Mignini): How was she in terms of behaviour?
A: She was rather exhausted, this yes, she was rather exhausted, she was shocked although she was also as if she were freed of a weight.
President: Pardon me, we are …
Defence (Dalla Vedova): I would like it recorded that she may refer only to facts, without any kind of colouring nor even less any personal interpretations because we are not here making an evaluation.
A: OK, I’ll stop.
President: It can be difficult separating the two things but it needs to be done, the witness must report.
Prosecutor (Mignini): She continued to cry, she continued to repeat these gestures?
A: Absolutely yes, yes.

Q: Then at a certain point the statement was finished.
A: Yes.

Q: What happened afterwards?
A: After she had said to me that she wanted to rest, she wanted to rest a bit and so it was done, in the sense that there was a little armchair, we made her seat herself, I myself had carried over a chair, she had rested her feet on the chair and she had almost fallen asleep for a little while.

Q: You were always present?
A: I was always present, I remained there in the room.

Q: What happened? She had slept for a bit?
A: It seems to me that she had snoozed, not sleeping deeply although she was resting, yes.

Q: Then what happened? Up until what time did you [142] remain there?
A: I remained there definitely until eight in the morning because I had expected, I had waited for my colleague to change shifts, I had absented myself though a couple of times after the typing up of the spontaneous declarations statement because I had gone to the ground floor to get a coffee and then to the bar, when it had opened, it would have been around half past seven.

Q: And then around eight…
A: I had left, yes.

Q: You were finished for the day?
A: Yes.

Q: And Colantone took over?
A: Yes, precisely my colleague Colantone.

Q: You then have said you undertook other activities, translations?
A: Exactly. I had looked after especially the correspondence let’s say, all that… the correspondence coming from the prison, I and my other colleague had curated this aspect, and also transcribing some prison recordings as well.

Q: In the course of your activity, corresponding to your responsibility, had you both come across, had you collated elements about which you had immediately informed the Flying Squad and had there then been investigations carried out, were there investigative developments based on what you both had come across?
A: I have to say that this correspondence had been substantial, there had been a great quantity of material which we weekly divided up between ourselves, to read and then to refer to the Police in writing. Let’s say broad brush things important for investigative purposes I believe had not surfaced except for character aspects, behavioural ones of this girl.
[143] Defence (Dalla Vedova): Again! This is not a fact, this is an opinion.
A: Very well, but I’m only saying what…
Defence (Dalla Vedova): On what basis then are you providing your opinion on her personality?
Prosecutor (Mignini): That on which she referred to the Flying Squad.
A: Yes.

Q: You have referred on the basis of your activity as interpreter you both decided to refer certain aspects?
A: Certain aspects.

Q: On which then investigations were based or not?
A: I don’t think so, regarding the letters I don’t think so, it doesn’t seem so to me anyway.

Q: On the intercept activity?
A: On the intercept activity, I transcribed, if I’m not mistaken, six prison recordings and I limited myself to transcribing the contents of the recordings and then I consigned the whole lot to the Flying Squad.

Q: On what you know based on these recordings were investigations then carried out? Did these intercepts produce any investigative results?
A: Presumably yes, sir, but I don’t know, frankly it’s not my area, I’m not able to say.

Q: On the evening of the 2nd, were you present at the Station?
A: The evening of the 2nd, no.

Q: So when did you arrive?
A: I arrived at three in the morning, I started work at three in the morning.

Q: And at three you participated in the interview, you heard Amanda another time?
A: No, the night of the fifth was the first time, I had not met her before.
[144]
Q: I have no other questions.
President: Pray, Civil Parties.

Civil Party (Pacelli): In completing and consolidating in cross-examination the questions by the Public Prosecutor, I refer to the morning of the 6th of November, to the time when Miss Knox had made her summary information. In that circumstance, Miss Knox was struck on the head with punches and slaps?
A: Absolutely not.

Q: In particular, was she struck on the head by a police woman?
A: Absolutely not!

Q: Miss Knox was however threatened?
A: No, I can exclude that categorically!

Q: With thirty years of prison…
A: No, no, absolutely.

Q: Was she however sworn at, in the sense that she was told she was a liar?
A: I was in the room the whole night and I saw nothing of all this.

Q: So the statements that had been made had been made spontaneously, voluntarily?
A: Yes.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): This…
President: Pardon, but let’s ask questions… if you please.
Civil Party (Pacelli): You were also present then during the summary information made at 5:45?
A: Yes.

Q: And were they done in the same way and methods as those of 1:45?
A: I would say yes. Absolutely yes.

Q: To remove any shadow of doubt from this whole matter, as far as the summary information provided at 5:45 Miss Knox was struck on the head with punches and slaps?
A: No.

Q: In particular, was she struck on the head by a police-woman?
A: No.
Interruption: She has already said that.
Civil Party (Pacelli): No, I had referred to the one at 1:45…
President: Yes, but pardon me Counsel has already responded.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): The preceding question was more general, it was referring to the whole night, therefore it is implicit that even the 1:45 statement, the question is…
Civil Party (Pacelli): No, my questions are pertinent Mr President for a very simple reason that I will explain to my friend Dalla Vedova.
President: Pardon me, no.
Civil Party (Pacelli): Everybody’s explaining Mr President! If it is permitted this once I would like to say…
[146] President: Counsel, let us ask questions.
Civil Party (Pacelli): Miss Amanda says: “I was struck on the head” and in the spontaneous declarations she made before Justice Micheli she expressly says and it was the basis of an incredible media fact, she had expressly said “I was hit on the head by a police woman”. Therefore there are two summary informations…
Defence (Dalla Vedova): What is the question?
Civil Party (Pacelli): The question is: at 5:45 when the summary information was being given in particular had she been hit on the head by a police woman, our Miss Knox?
Defence (Dalla Vedova): I don’t object to this question because it has already been asked before in general for the whole night, therefore I consider it to have already been answered.
Civil Party (Pacelli): I asked it earlier about the summary information statement at 1:45, now I’m referring to the one at 5:45.
President: Pardon me, Counsel, but I remember you having foreshadowed this referring to the succeeding statement with the other question, “and also in the other interview there was conduct…”
Civil Party (Pacelli): It was ad abbundianzam for later clarity.
President: Pardon all, but the exigency is that repeated questions be avoided.
[147] Civil Party (Pacelli): It is not a repetition, they are two summary informations.
President: Let us avoid a surplus of words though.
Civil Party (Pacelli): In sum, in the summary informations of 1:45 and 5:45 anybody punch Amanda in the head?
A: No.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): But this is another repetition! He’s insisting on the same question already asked and which has already been responded to, we are not opposed!
Civil Party (Pacelli): If it please the court, Mr President, I have no further questions.
President: Pray, the defence.
Defence (Ghirga): The night of the 6th, why did the summary information formally commence at 1:45, this interview, let’s call it this, on what floor of the Station did it unfold?
A: On the third floor, in the offices of the Flying Squad.

Q: Contemporaneously also under way was the interview, quote-unquote, of Sollecito?
A: This I didn’t know.

Q: No I have asked you whether, minutes earlier, minutes later, for the one we have the opening and closing timestamps, for the other only the opening, contemporaneously, a little before, I don’t know, on the same floor of the Station there was Sollecito’s interview unfolding.
[148] A: Yes, I’m up to speed with this.

Q: Do you remember if anyone originating from the room where Sollecito’s interview was in progress came into your room, where Amanda’s interview was in progress, and said, saying that Sollecito in some way, quote-unquote, had dropped Amanda’s alibi or some wording of the sort?
A: Let’s say that I saw it, I remember that Inspector Ficcara left…

Q: No I’m asking if anyone…
A: If anyone had come in then, no, no.
President: So you remember Inspector Ficcara had left…
A: I remember Inspector Ficcara had left.
President: But no-one who came in nor in particular coming in said this?
A: Absolutely not.
Defence (Ghirga): After this someone come in, someone went out…
President: No, someone left she remembers.
Prosecutor (Comodi): No, no-one came in and likely someone exited.
President: We’re at the witness answers!
Defence (Ghirga): But we days ago we had heard… we were here in this courtroom… I commented out loud but 15 days ago we heard that someone had come in.
President: It can be treated as contestable.
[149] Defence (Ghirga): Now I don’t have the transcripts of the earlier hearings because they haven’t been done, but in this light I would like to try to contest them. After somebody had exited, did the episode of the little message from Patrick occur at that moment or had it already come out earlier?
A: Look exactly no, not at the same time, not anyway immediately after… That is once Inspector Ficcara had re-entered, that’s what I want to say. That is this thing about the message was under way, now I don’t remember exactly if it had already been stated before or come out at another time, frankly I don’t remember this particular.

Q: The fact is that after the message there was the change in mood, the one that you have described.
A: Exactly.

Q: You know that there’s a bar in the Station.
A: There’s a bar.

Q: It’s managed privately and for some…
A: I think it’s private, frankly I don’t know.

Q: Do you know when it opens in the morning?
A: No, when I start work at eight the bar is open, when it opens I don’t know.

Q: Thank you.


Defence (Dalla Vedova): Still on the subject of the night of the 5th and 6th, you know, have said that you got there around half past midnight.
A: Yes, around then, more or less.

Q: Are you aware of when Amanda had arrived at the Station?
A: No, frankly no.

Q: So you do not know how much time that day Amanda had been interviewed?
A: No, I had been advised by phone, I was [150] told to go and I went, frankly other aspects I was not aware of at that moment.

Q: You were always present with Amanda up until she had gone away?
A: Yes, I was always present. I had, I was saying before, absented myself a couple of times, but it was already morning to go and get a coffee, but I’m telling you it was almost day, it was day.

Q: You were translating questions that were being put by who exactly?
A: By Inspector Ficcara in primis and also by SCO Agent Ivano, I don’t remember his last name, who in fact was proceeding to interview her, both of them were asking questions and I was looking after the translation first from one then from the other.

Q: Do you remember whether any of the questions had fronted the fact that there was evidence that Amanda was in Via Della Pergola.
A: I don’t understand, in what sense?

Q: That is, do you remember whether it was put to Amanda that there was now evidence that she was at the house in Via Pergola that night, the night of the murder?
A: No, I don’t think that was said to her.

Q: Was there anyone who said the words: “you’re a liar”?
A: Never.

Q: Still on translating these questions, do you remember if one of the questions concerned the fact that Raffaele Sollecito had made declarations different from those with respect to Amanda’s?
A: This came to be acknowledged, they came to be said, if I’m not mistaken, although I have to repeat a great deal of time has passed by since then so the details of the questions I’m not able to refer to with the requisite precision.

Q: Only the main thrust.
[151] A: Yes, maybe something was said to her about that.

Q: That…
A: That Raffaele was not standing by her, he was saying things differently with respect to hers.

Q: Do you also remember the reference to the message, SMS, on the mobile phone, exactly how it was used? The questions were about this message?
A: There was a really simple question, very linear, I asked the signorina if she had replied to the message and she said: “no”.
President: Only the questions that were put to her.
A: Yes, this in relation to the message.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): How did the reference to the message come about? What was the -first question? Who brought out the message?
A: Because she was asked how come she had not gone to work that night.

Q: And?
A: And it came out that she had received the message from her employer which in fact told her that she did not have to go to work and everything snowballed from here.

Q: Everything, that is there was a reply by Knox?
A: There was a reply.

Q: Do you remember the text of the reply?
A: The reply…
President: Although on this maybe…
Defence (Dalla Vedova): I have made a translation.
A: The text was in Italian.
President: Perhaps we should stay with the questions.
[152] A: It was in Italian.
Prosecutor (Comodi): { incomprehensible, out of microphone range }
President: Please, perhaps we can…
Interruption: If they want to do it, let’s let them.
Prosecutor (Comodi): On the accord of the parties there is no limitation.
President: Pray continue.
A: The text of the reply was in Italian.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): How come in Italian, Amanda is American?
A: This I’m not able to say, ask her… I don’t know. The text, the reply by Ms Knox was in Italian.

Q: She had the capacity to speak and write in Italian in your opinion that night of the 5th and 6th?
A: Look…
President: Was Amanda saying the occasional word in Italian?
A: Yes, yes, she was comprehending sufficiently what was being asked.
President: So she was also speaking a little bit of Italian?
A: Yes, yes.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): Returning to the examination, the duration, these questions lasted until 1:45, then they were recommenced and then they were interrupted at 5:45 with the typing of the statements?
[153] A: No, no. Let’s say there was an interruption in the sense that there was… I now frankly don’t remember the timing, but it seems to me that statement was done with quickly, all up, then there was a brief pause because we were also trying to comfort the girl, she had had this emotional shock so I had tried to help her, also, after which there was the interview with Dr Mignini.

Q: Do you remember more or less at what time this emotional shock had arrived?
A: That I actually don’t remember.

Q: But before the redaction of the 1:45 statement or after?
A: No, this emotional shock occurred at the moment in which the message was referred to.

Q: And therefore the message from Lumumba, therefore coinciding with the accusation against Lumumba. Can you remember at what time?
A: I don’t remember this, sorry, but the exact time this happened I don’t know, I had arrived at that hour and frankly after that never looked at the clock.

Q: But the 1:45 statement was typed before or after this emotional shock?
A: It was typed at the moment in which the girl had had this… they were trying at that moment to understand how she had spent the evening. So they were trying to understand what she had done from a particular time up until the following morning and in the course of that series of questions the particular about the message came out and at that point the statement was typed up, which came to be closed off, after which everything else.

Q: But why did the message have such a reaction…
President: Pardon Counsel, but we cannot…
A: I’ll tell you straight away.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): No. no. wait I haven’t finished the question. I wanted to understand this emotional shock was caused by the message, by the reading of the message or by the fact that it was displayed or was there some other element of fact relative to the analysis?
A: I can tell you straight away because I remember it distinctly, she said she hadn’t replied to the message. Once though the message was shown to her obviously that was a plain lie!

Q: Do you remember who found the message on the phone?
President: Pardon me Counsel, who found it at that moment?
Defence (Dalla Vedova): Yes, who realised that there was a message in the phone.
A: I think Inspector Ficcara… that is there was this phone on the table that was being checked, I now…

Q: But was it Amanda who provided this phone?
A: Yes, yes, she had handed it over, she was showing it, she had already handed it over to the officers.

Q: Do you remember in particular if the message had been shown by Amanda?
President: Counsel you may close.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): In particular was it Amanda who emphasises the message, who showed the message?
A: No, no, she had said that she had not replied to that message.
[155]
Q: Although you have also said that she handed the over phone over.
A: Yes, but she had already handed it over before, the officers were already looking through it if I’m not mistaken, from before.
President: Pardon me, Doctor, perhaps Counsel is asking if you can pinpoint this moment and whether Amanda had the phone or whether she had placed it at the disposition of those who were examining her, questioning her. Amanda Knox brought up the message on the phone or else it was someone else who…
A: No, it was someone else.
President: Some person had found it?
A: It was someone else.
President: Not Amanda Knox who showed everybody?
A: Not her personally.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): So the message was noticed by a functionary who was in the room?
A: Yes.

Q: Do you remember who? In the end there weren’t many of you.
A: I think Inspector Ficcara, although I’m not certain.

Q: You have said that this message had caused an emotional shock, there must have been a specific moment when this happened?
A: Very specific, yes, that’s true.

Q: But you don’t remember how they found this message?
A: Now someone, I think Inspector Ficcara or Assistant Zugarini, I don’t remember now, had picked up this phone and this message was read, it was retrieved, maybe she hadn’t deleted it. Frankly, Counsel, I don’t know the detail.
[156]
Q: Madam, you were the victim of an accident where you had a fracture of the legs?
A: Yes, that’s true.

Q: You recounted this episode to Knox that night?
A: Yes.

Q: Why?
A: Because I had seen that the girl… I want to point out one thing first, generally when I find myself in these interview situations, the first thing I look to do is immediately try to cultivate a rapport, to enter into contact with the person with whom… above all treating young girls, I am a mother of two girls more or less the same age as Miss Knox and I was well aware that she could have needed assistance.

Q: Do you remember also having mentioned to Knox that in this personal experience of yours you had suffered a trauma by which you were unable to remember the episode of how your leg fracture happened?
A: Yes, it’s true, I told her about it.
Civil Part (Maresca): President, if it please the court, the Knox defence is in cross-examination, therefore the purpose should also be limited…
Defence (Dalla Vedova): We are also evaluating the activity of the witness.
Civil Party (Maresca): But we’re in cross-examination with these questions…
President: Counsel, although it’s indicated at point 60 relative to the evening/night, so we can reintroduce…
[157] Civil Party (Maresca): It was not subjected to examination-in-chief.
President: Pray continue.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): You then have recounted that a rapport of humane assistance was created even for a difficult moment which you have recounted.
A: Yes.

Q: And you recounted this personal experience where you, by virtue of this accident, have had a memory hole.
A: Yes.

Q: So you have presented a proposition to Amanda where she also, who was in such a difficult situation at that moment could have had a memory hole in relation to all the questions that were being put?
A: No, I didn’t say this.
Civil Party (Maresca): Mr President, there is opposition to this mode…
Defence (Bongiorno): { incomprehensible, out of microphone range }
Civil Party (Maresca): No, I oppose when I need to, first of all, then the President decides. At any rate since it is in cross-examination I formally object to this form of examination.
President: It’s true that it is in cross-examination, but the borderline is a little blurred by the indications that in the witness list the Prosecutor’s Office had formulated and here we’re speaking of “relating to the evening/night between 5 November and 6 November”. So we will be able to enter into this again [later].
[158] Defence (Dalla Vedova): This is an ascertainment of a fact on the evening of 5/6, it’s a fact, so I am trying to understand.
President: We may proceed.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): So you put to Amanda the possibility that in life during moments of stress one can have a memory hole?
A: No, I did not say it in that way, Counsel. I repeat, as my principal duty, I do it habitually, to try to assist the best way possible any person who finds themselves in conditions of that sort, I often utilise even details of my personal life. I had also told her I have two daughters, that I had been thrown out of bed, jokingly, that night to come to the Station, that I had left them sleeping, that we had even, perhaps Miss Knox doesn’t remember, we had even swapped a couple of words in German because she had told me that she had been to Berlin. So in the context of all of this I had also spoken of having had this experience because I do it habitually exactly because I was aware that it was however a situation that required a modicum of solidarity.

Q: However your experience was based on the fact that you had, in a difficult moment, had a memory hole?
President: Of this kind.
Civil Party (Maresca): { incomprehensible, outside microphone range }
President: We won’t translate, we will bypass translating the responses, [159] we are at the witness responses!
Defence (Dalla Vedova): But she said them before.
President: If she said them then they’re recorded.
Defence (Ghirga): The response has been recorded.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): But it’s impossible to carry out an examination like this, if I have to be continuously interrupted! I am asking perfectly legitimate questions on a fact that has occurred…
President: It’s important that you try to avoid returning to the same questions, this maybe can be avoided taking into account the responses that arise.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): As a result of these stories of yours, had you noticed that Knox had some difficulties in remembering even her night with Sollecito?
A: Yes, I noticed that. I told her her account was an extremely vague one, uncertain, fragmentary, she wasn’t able to remember, to give any precise answers.

Q: When she was doing this was she crying?
A: No, at that moment no.

Q: But you said at a certain point she was crying, only when she had had the emotional shock…
A: Yes, yes.

Q: You don’t remember the exact time this emotional shock happened? Pardon me for insisting but I think it’s important.
A: But if I keep on saying I don’t remember, I can’t…

Q: I understand. On the question from Counsel, you at one point referred to someone having asked [160] her if she had wanted…
A: Yes.

Q: How come this had not been put into the statements, the two declarations?
A: I can’t really say, Counsel, it wasn’t me who typed up the statement.

Q: Do you remember who made this reception, this offer, who had said to Amanda: “if you want you can have a lawyer”?
A: Inspector Ficcara.

Q: Do you remember if it was before 1:45?
A: Counsel, again, I don’t remember the time.

Q: But was it in the morning when it was already daylight?
A: No, no, I didn’t look out the window, I was concentrating on other things, I don’t remember if it was light outside.

Q: You don’t remember if someone had said to her: “at this time a lawyer is worse for you, having a lawyer is worse for you”?
A: I don’t understand.

Q: That someone had said to her: “at this time a lawyer is worse for you, having a lawyer is worse for you”?
A: To Miss Knox?

Q: Yes.
A: Absolutely no.

Q: Do you also remember in the report that Raffaele in fact had made differing declarations that someone had said: “if you don’t tell me what you know they’ll put you in prison for thirty years”?
A: No, I repeat that these things were not said!

Q: Have you ever translated any words of this sort into English?
A: No, I deny that.

Q: On the correspondence can you be more precise? How many were these letters that you translated?
[161] A: Around about it would have been 600 letters incoming and outgoing.

Q: In what time period did you have this task, from when to when?
A: The whole period following the arrest of Miss Knox, I exactly now when this period started specifically I’m not able to say, but I imagine that already in the month of November it had started.

Q: Up to?
A: Up to the closure of the investigations.

Q: So in May/June 2008?
A: Yes, around about.

Q: You also worked on the intercepted conversations?
A: Some yes.

Q: Can you recount how they came about exactly?
A: Either I or my colleague, this aspect of the investigative activity was looked after specially by my colleague Colantone, I helped her sometimes when she wasn’t able to go to prison. So one of us with officers from the Flying Squad went to prison, we were put in a tiny room adjacent the place, in the other room where the conversation would take place between Miss Knox and her parents or whoever was going to visit her and we would listen on headphones to the entirety, the straight conversation and then we would immediately refer it on if there were particular things that jumped out. Obviously on a second run we would proceed with a re-hearing of the recording which we were also watching on video and with the transcription of the contents.

Q: In relation to your affirmation that you were pointing out what jumped out at you, in what way and by what criteria? What were the themes that according to you could have been of interest to the [162] investigation? Had you received instructions or was it at your discretion?
A: No, absolutely not, I attended to what I was told to do. For things relevant to the investigations, I referred to everything that related to the case, so each time anyone spoke about the case or of facts in it obviously these passages were rendered completely, all the rest, for example, when her Dad, often, used to recount in a very humorous way his misadventures in Italy, or what he had done during the course of the day, obviously these tracts of the conversation were rendered, also for lack of time, in indirect speech and summarised, in this sense.

Q: So summarised by you two?
A: Summarised by us certainly.

Q: So it was not a translation of the words, but it was a summary of the context and of the argument treated?
A: Yes, but always in a very detailed way.

Q: But what were the instructions you received for evaluating the importance of these documents? Especially if you are also able to say who gave you the task and whether they had asked you: “check for this topic”, this is what I want to know.
A: Counsel, it was requested to underline and refer totally everything that was said during the course of the intercepts relating to the case in question. Each time Miss Knox referred to her particular case, the trial, obviously these aspects were listened to, transcribed fully and they came to be given a certain relevance, graphically. This is what was asked to be done.

Q: But the topics, what were they, those that you considered as important?
A: Those relating to the case, the procedural case, to her [163] memories of Meredith, to everything that related to the case.

Q: So you found elements of this kind in the correspondence?
A: No, I was speaking about the intercepts.

Q: Yes, pardon me, this also applies to the correspondence?
A: Yes, also to the correspondence.

Q: Did you [plural] do a complete translation, sworn, word for word or did you make a digest of the correspondence?
A: I’m telling you Counsel there were more than 600 letters, Miss Knox above all else is an able writer, in the sense that she likes writing a lot, she even writes ten-page letters, obviously in the accounts, in the transcription of the letters we translated completely any important letters that related to the case, while the others, of minor interest, for example when she was talking about her friends, when she was talking about her family, obviously those were…
President: Pardon me, about her friends with reference to which friends, those found in Italy?
A: No, her friends in America, everything that related to… and obviously those were reported in an abridged manner because there was not the time beyond anything else to do a full translation of all that material.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): You worked on the 17 November intercept, on the analysis of the intercept?
A: No, that if I’m not mistaken was transcribed by my colleague.

Q: Do you remember how many intercepts you worked on?
A: I looked after I think six intercepts, although not [164] those from November, those that were done in March if I’m not mistaken.

Q: Are you aware whether following your work any further investigative activity in relation to the intercepts and to the correspondence, these 600 letters, was carried out?
A: We consigned all the material, then obviously this is not our area of expertise, it’s not up to us.

Q: So no other activity was carried out?
A: No, this I don’t know.

Q: Was there correspondence between the two accused that you analysed?
A: No, I didn’t translate anything in that regard.

Q: Between Knox and Lumumba.
A: Nothing.

Q: And Knox and Guede?
A: Nothing.

Q: And with lawyers?
A: No.

Q: Not even Americans?
A: No.

Q: With journalists?
A: No.

Q: With politicians?
A: No.

Q: So they were family and friends?
A: Family and friends, certainly.
President: Counsel this, but politicians… it could be a politician who isn’t… it becomes a little bit difficult for the witness if for the category of person, it would have to signify that the witness knew in which category the each visitor belonged, to avoid putting herself into difficulty.
[165] Defence (Dalla Vedova): I asked only, Mr President, because information has come out on the mass-media that was referring to presumed correspondence even with famous people, both foreign and Italian, who hold political office, in this sense I was asking she had had knowledge of them. One last question: your work, still in relation to the mass-media, have you had contacts with the mass-media?
A: Absolutely not.

Q: Thank you.


[to be continued]
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6171
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Alex_K » Sat May 18, 2013 8:24 am

She wouldn't answer the really interesting questions, like the duration and the order of things.
Alex_K
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:16 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MichaelB » Sat May 18, 2013 8:40 am

Look at where that parasite Maresca jumps in.

Q: Do you remember also having mentioned to Knox that in this personal experience of yours you had suffered a trauma by which you were unable to remember the episode of how your leg fracture happened?
A: Yes, it’s true, I told her about it.
Civil Part (Maresca): President, if it please the court, the Knox defence is in cross-examination, therefore the purpose should also be limited…

and then again

Q: So you have presented a proposition to Amanda where she also, who was in such a difficult situation at that moment could have had a memory hole in relation to all the questions that were being put?
A: No, I didn’t say this.
Civil Party (Maresca): Mr President, there is opposition to this mode…
Defence (Bongiorno): { incomprehensible, out of microphone range }
Civil Party (Maresca): No, I oppose when I need to, first of all, then the President decides. At any rate since it is in cross-examination I formally object to this form of examination.

and then again

Q: However your experience was based on the fact that you had, in a difficult moment, had a memory hole?
President: Of this kind.
Civil Party (Maresca): { incomprehensible, outside microphone range }

CDV frustrated

Defence (Dalla Vedova): But it’s impossible to carry out an examination like this, if I have to be continuously interrupted! I am asking perfectly legitimate questions on a fact that has occurred…
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6171
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Alex_K » Sat May 18, 2013 8:48 am

Maresca is a nasty piece of work, but he's a hired gun - a lawyer like him is not supposed to have much of a conscience. Now who's responsible for inserting him as a civil party into that show? We all know the answer I think.
Alex_K
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:16 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MustBeQuantum » Sat May 18, 2013 9:02 am

So, how many hours was Knox there without a bathroom break? Did Donnino accompany her to the bathroom or was it Ficara or Zugarini? Seven hours without a bathroom? What happened to Knox when Donnino was out of the room getting her coffee and breaks?

How many Perugian and Roman law enforcement folk signed that initial calunnia charge?

Waiting for more of their shooting and scoring.
MustBeQuantum
 
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:57 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MustBeQuantum » Sat May 18, 2013 9:04 am

Alex_K wrote:She wouldn't answer the really interesting questions, like the duration and the order of things.


Well everyone in the whole wide world except Knox and Sollecito are allowed to have those little memory problems.
MustBeQuantum
 
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:57 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby kindlekitten » Sat May 18, 2013 10:57 am

MustBeQuantum wrote:So, how many hours was Knox there without a bathroom break? Did Donnino accompany her to the bathroom or was it Ficara or Zugarini? Seven hours without a bathroom? What happened to Knox when Donnino was out of the room getting her coffee and breaks?

How many Perugian and Roman law enforcement folk signed that initial calunnia charge?

Waiting for more of their shooting and scoring.


I can't remember how many hours it ended up that Amanda was denied the bathroom, but after reading her book it turns out that she was menstruating that night. She had gone way past her need to change her sanitary supplies. I think only women can relate to the feel, smell, distress and general humiliation that causes. this truly adds another layer of horror on the situation and stress that she was put through during that interrogation
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MustBeQuantum » Sat May 18, 2013 11:08 am

kindlekitten wrote:
MustBeQuantum wrote:So, how many hours was Knox there without a bathroom break? Did Donnino accompany her to the bathroom or was it Ficara or Zugarini? Seven hours without a bathroom? What happened to Knox when Donnino was out of the room getting her coffee and breaks?

How many Perugian and Roman law enforcement folk signed that initial calunnia charge?

Waiting for more of their shooting and scoring.


I can't remember how many hours it ended up that Amanda was denied the bathroom, but after reading her book it turns out that she was menstruating that night. She had gone way past her need to change her sanitary supplies. I think only women can relate to the feel, smell, distress and general humiliation that causes. this truly adds another layer of horror on the situation and stress that she was put through during that interrogation


My own opinion is that these clowns believed the "suspect" was "spontaneously" bleeding as a sign of her guilt. Aren't murderers supposed to bleed the same wounds; or is that the dead body "spontaneously" bleeding? The thought of Mignini sitting there taking "confession" of that young woman is literally one of the creepiest things I have ever heard in a supposedly "First World" country. Doesn't anybody else remember "The Curse" (monthlies) back in the day? ETA: IMO Mignini is literally one of the creepiest and most superstitious people who is supposedly "educated" and on a par with the mullahs enforcing Sharia law (who are also supposedly "educated").
MustBeQuantum
 
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:57 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MichaelB » Sat May 18, 2013 9:47 pm

ranscript Donnino part 2

Part 1 is at XXXI.128 [here].

= = =

Defence (Ghirga): A question about the letters, but you translated these 600 letters, Dr Colantone translated them, you translated them… translated, looked at, made a précis of because first it seemed to be an activity of the prior witness, now it seems to be by your activity. This 600-letter correspondence, it’s not a fundamental question, did you do it together, dividing the work?
A: There are four of us interpreters at the Station and all of us worked, we all collaborated regarding this case and generally we team-work in the sense that we distribute the work, we check on the proceedings, so all of us know everything and also regarding these letters an analogous thing was done.

Q: If I show you Amanda’s 1:45 summary informations from the 6th, but I say to you there aren’t any questions, and I ask you: how come not one question was statemented on the part of… not even the acronym ADR [“replies as follows”], nothing?
A: This I don’t…

Q: You’ve said that there were questions, you translated them, there’s not even one.
A: If there aren’t…
[165] President: Counsel is asking how come none of the questions were reported and not even the ADR?
A: I don’t know about this.
Prosecutor (Mignini): I oppose, with the spontaneous declarations there was the interview, with questions and contestation.
Defence (Ghirga): Meanwhile those from 1:45 are summary informations and I repeat not one question was statemented why? It can’t be clearer than this. Were there any questions or weren’t they statemented?
Civil Party (Maresca): Mr President, if it please the court, I oppose because the Doctor had not typed up the statement and so…
President: Though the witness must answer.
Defence (Ghirga): She translated everything!
Civil Party (Maresca): But it is not her who typed up the statement, for this she cannot respond.
President: Although, pardon, let the question be posed. We have heard, they are the summary informations and not the spontaneous declarations for which the questions in sum… Now about these summary informations, Defence is asking, the questions being put to the person who was being examined do not seem to have been reported, not even under the profile of ADR, this abbreviation, that you know.
A: Mr President, on the merely technical and formal aspect I do not know how to respond.
[167] Defence (Ghirga): I was wanting to reply to the Public Prosecutor…
President: No, let’s only ask questions of the witness and leaved it at that!
Defence (Ghirga): On the spontaneous declarations I recall that they’re in the file as corpo del reato for the calunnia, and OK, these spontaneousnesses have been declared absolutely inadmissible even for clarification purposes.
Prosecutor (Mignini): Questions Mr President, I oppose!
Defence (Ghirga): No because someone has always called them…
President: Pardon, now we are examining the witness, if there are questions to be put let’s do so otherwise let’s proceed to the next step!
Defence (Ghirga): But to also be clear. No further questions.

Defence (Bongiorno): Still in cross-examination in the ambit of that night which has been discussed up until now. You have mentioned replying to my colleagues that you had spoken to Amanda about the fact that you have daughters, that you were woken at night etc to create a humane rapport. I ask you the reasons why for which your role was mere interpreter, therefore to translate, it was necessary to create a humane rapport.
A: It was necessary Counsel, yes, because it is a thing that I do habitually and it is a fundamental thing because it also establishes a relationship of trust with the [168] person who one has next to one. I above all am a mediator, so I am not, as you say, a simple executor and a little machine that translates words. Beside me I have a person who however finds herself in the middle of people that do not speak her language, I am her channel and I feel a duty to establish a rapport that goes a little bit beyond the exquisitely technical thing. I do it habitually with everybody, I didn’t do it only that night, I do it all the time.

Q: I ask only what does “I’m a mediator” mean? Your role mustn’t be, at the moment when a formal statement is being done, with questions and answers, a mere translator or you… that is, define mediator better for me.
A: Being a mediator means that however I am able to also, by means of personal conversation. So I also make this my duty and carry them out.

Q: So in the ambit of your role in which you were mediator you then considered it worthwhile to recount to Amanda even your personal experience relating to the leg fracture etc.
A: Yes.

Q: In which moment did you consider it worthwhile to recount this part of your history, the leg fracture, the missing memories?
A: This in the specifics Counsel I…

Q: At the beginning when you were trying to create a humane rapport you said: “I’m mentioning that I’m the mother of two daughters etc etc” or during the interview?
A: I think that it was during the interview.

Q: In particular in which phase of the interview? Already when there had been Amanda’s shock or not?
A: This, Counsel, I don’t remember, exactly when I said this… when I told her about this [169] thing about my life I don’t know.

Q: This episode that you recounted, was only Amanda listening to this narration or everybody that was in the room?
A: No, no, everybody.

Q: Was this externalisation of yours statemented and therefore we will find it in the documentation or not?
A: No, no, no it wasn’t… I think.

Q: You did not ask yourself the question whether in some way this species of your, personal, narration from an interpreter might taint the interview?
A: In what way could it have tainted it?! Honestly I did not ask myself that.
Civil Party (Pacelli): I oppose, Mr President.
President: Let us present the facts only, opposition will be…
Defence (Bongiorno): I have no further questions.

Prosecutor (Comodi): When you assisted Amanda Knox as interpreter, at the end of the interviewing did you read the statement?
A: Yes.

Q: Amanda in some way contested the contents of the statement?
A: Absolutely not. I even remember that she wants to see, to read the statement in Italian and follow word for word what had been written down and was asking me for amplifications if she didn’t understand.

Q: Amplifications in English?
A: Amplifications in English definitely.

Q: Did it appear to you that Amanda Knox had asked at the beginning [170] that even the questions be statemented?
A: No, it didn’t.

Q: Did it appear to you that she had asked the questions and answers be statemented in her mother tongue, that is English, as well as in Italian?
A: No it didn’t.

President
Q: One circumstance if you can refer to it, if you remember, you were called because the examination of Amanda Knox, her summary informations, were already under way or because they had not yet started and so you assisted up until the start of this?
A: Nothing was said to me on the phone, simply get up and go. When I arrived I was made to enter into the room where Miss Knox already was.

Q: And who was present together with her?
A: Inspector Ficcara certainly, I don’t at what moment there was also Assistant Zugarini, this I don’t recall well. Then certainly this SCO agent Ivano Raffo, him yes.

Q: So you entered and…
A: And they were already there.

Q: But Amanda Knox was already talking, they were already making her…
A: Yes, she was answering questions, they were talking.

Q: So they were speaking in Italian in that instant?
A: Yes, they were speaking in Italian.

Q: Are you able to say if when you arrived Amanda Knox’s mobile phone had already been placed at the disposition of the ones who were interviewing her, or else this was a later time [171] period?
A: I think it was a later time period.

Q: Vey well.

Defence (Dalla Vedova): You arrived at the Station at what time exactly?
A: I’ll tell you Counsel…
President: At 00:30, she had already mentioned it.
Defence (Dalla Vedova): How can you be sure that it was 00:30?
A: In fact I never said I was sure.

Q: So how can you say it was 00:30?
A: I have said that I have considered that I had received the phone call around about 23:30–23:40, considering that I spent about half an hour at my house, considering that I also had to get ready I made a calculation, I left immediately and I would have arrived around about that time.

Q: How come you knew that it was eleven forty-five when they called you?
A: Because I had just… it was only a little while that I had gone to sleep and generally I go to bed more or less around eleven thirty, eleven twenty.

Q: But did you look at a clock?
A: I was not sleeping yet though, so I was in bed.

Q: Did you look at a clock?
A: No, I didn’t look at a clock.

Q: And when you left the Station in the morning at 6?
A: I left at eight, I waited for my colleague Colantone to arrive.

President: On this… only on the questions that were [172] put. I wanted to ask is there a time-recorder at the Station?
A: Yes, yes.

Q: But you inserted the time-recorder?
A: No, there’s an out-of-hours pass.

Q: And you inserted it?
A: Yes, yes.

Q: So then it can show at what time you arrived?
A: Yes.

Q: Very well, you may go.
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6171
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Mon May 20, 2013 2:48 pm

The Borsini-Belardi report (Guede's appeal):
Rudy Motivation Document.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Stacyhs » Tue May 28, 2013 2:07 pm

I find it telling that Donnino denies hearing anyone threaten Amanda with 30 years in prison while Raffaele AND Lumumba (Nov 25, 2007 interview) claimed the exact same thing. There is no way the three of them could have known that the others had been threatened with that, too. The only possible explanation for all three of them to report that is if it were the truth.
Stacyhs
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:52 pm

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby pmop57 » Tue May 28, 2013 2:15 pm

Stacyhs wrote:I find it telling that Donnino denies hearing anyone threaten Amanda with 30 years in prison while Raffaele AND Lumumba (Nov 25, 2007 interview) claimed the exact same thing. There is no way the three of them could have known that the others had been threatened with that, too. The only possible explanation for all three of them to report that is if it were the truth.

Read about the actions of Italien Police during the 27th G8 summit in Genua and the following trials against police officials because of violence. Rather interesting!
pmop57
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Stacyhs » Wed May 29, 2013 12:41 pm

>Read about the actions of Italien Police during the 27th G8 summit in Genua and the following trials against police officials because of violence. Rather interesting!<

Yes, I have been aware of that for quite a long time. It is further proof that the actions of the police in Italy, like almost anywhere, are not always honorable or legal. The colpevolisti have great difficulty in accepting this as they want to believe every claim made by the Perugian police, including their ridiculous claims of serving tea and cakes to Knox and being "firm but polite" during her interrogations. "Firm but polite" questioning does not elicit cries for help heard outside the interrogation room.

The Perugian police and Mignini have shown by their own actions that they don't follow the law nor are they trustworthy nor honorable:

1. Failure to provide lawyers to Knox, Sollecito or Lumumba.
2. Failure to record (or did they?) the interrogations of any of the 3 even after becoming suspects.
3. The conviction of Mignini for abuse of office.
4. The ridiculous and numerous slander suits against anyone who dares speak out against them.
5. The multitude of "leaks" to the media that were either totally untrue or misleading thus influencing public perception and even that of the juries.
6. The failure of Stefanoni, in court, to disclose the testing of the "luminol revealed footprints" with TMB thus implying they were in blood.
Stacyhs
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:52 pm

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Sat Jun 08, 2013 2:12 pm

Judge Massei's Report:
In Italian:
Massei Report (italian).pdf

PMF translation:
Massei_Report.pdf

The missing pages:
RoseMontague wrote:The complete pages of these are contained in this attachment. All the documents we had previously had these two pages cut down the middle and were missing from the PMF translation. Hans has done an OCR of these 2 pages, also attached.
Massei sentenza corte assise pages 183 to 321.pdf
Massei pg. 288 and pg. 304 (OCR).doc


Massei pg. 288 and pg. 304 (OCR).pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby diocletian » Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:46 pm

Bump
diocletian
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:09 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:18 am

507 minuta FINALE 9ottobre.doc
Google 507 minuta FINALE 9ottobre.doc
507 request for additional expert testing etc.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:56 am

perugia_udienza_26_settembre_2009.pdf
Gino ppt (converted to pdf)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:58 am

google translation of last page above pdf (Gino ppt)

Lastly, as regards the sample 36B, Dr. Stefanoni stated before the
GUP, that the method used for its quantification was the Real-time PCR and that the
quantification was "... in the order of a few hundred pg ..." (page 178 of
transcript): The documentation is not made ​​available to us-in the reports of the
quantification with Quantifiler-said sample.
We have to think that even today we do not have all the documentation relating to the
investigations of forensic genetics carried out?

In addition, the quantification with fluorometer gave as a result we reiterate "too low" and
technical report filed is said (p. 78): "... tested positive for traces
quantification (tracks A and B), were subjected to amplification and subsequent
capillary electrophoresis. The traces negative to the quantification (tracks C, D, E, F, G) have been analyzed after concentration through the use of instrumentation Speed-Vac SC110
brand "Savant" ... ". Even for the latter the result of the quantification
Qubit fluorometer was "too low" and it seems that only those tracks have been concentrated ...
not track 36B as is asserted in front of the GUP.
Note how the track 36B in the report proves to be positive to the quantification!
But if the quantification of the exhibit 36B is negative, it is not wrong to think-in basis also
the electrophoretic pattern obtained-that there may have been contamination of the sample
during amplification.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:08 am

ps bra.pdf
some of Steffis presentations (also ppts converted to pdfs)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:11 am

ps 36b.pdf
36B Stefi ppt (converted to pdf)

more later
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:18 am

ps reps not tested.pdf
Stefi's reps not tested (ppt converted to pdf)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:22 am

ps y freq..pdf
PS Y freq presentation (ppt converted to pdf)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:29 am

ps large kitchen utensil.pdf
Stefi's knife ppt (converted to pdf)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:29 am

more maybe tomorrow
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

The Invoice

Postby Hans » Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:13 pm

The bill for the prosecution's "visual reconstruction of the murder of Meredith Kercher" aka "the cartoon":
invoice.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:21 am

testimonianza2.pdf
This is Stefi's main DNA/evidence presentation (also a ppt converted to a pdf).

Some edits done on page 38 (thanks Hans).

Large file.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:38 am

RoseMontague in this post on the main thread wrote:Here is something I have labeled SC, not sure where it came from:

Deleted text. Found full Italian one. I disavow any knowledge. LOL.
Rudy SC text Italian.doc
RoseMontague in this post on the main thread wrote:I am thinking this was an appeal of the detention order but I am not certain. I had a more complete English translation (probably Google, I just don't remember it-I know that sounds terrible). I had it filed in my Rudy folder.

attached.
Rudy SC text English.doc
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Alessi's revelations

Postby Hans » Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:49 am

Something I found collecting la repubblica articles:
IL VERBALE DELLA DEPOSIZIONE
attached to preserve:
guede.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Katody » Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:56 am

Does anyone have the calunnia SC appeal of Amanda's defence? I remember seeing it, now can't find it anywhere.
Katody
 
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:31 pm

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby MichaelB » Mon Jun 24, 2013 4:22 am

Katody wrote:Does anyone have the calunnia SC appeal of Amanda's defence? I remember seeing it, now can't find it anywhere.


Documents thread

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=2433
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6171
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:31 am

MichaelB wrote:
Katody wrote:Does anyone have the calunnia SC appeal of Amanda's defence? I remember seeing it, now can't find it anywhere.


Documents thread

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=2433

The Italian can be found here:
http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=40565#p40565
Rose's translation here:
http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=40582#p40582
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:22 pm

Has anyone located Mignini's closing statements from the Massei trial? Specifically Nov 20, 2009?? The 8-hour long diatribe??
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:24 pm

KayPea wrote:Has anyone located Mignini's closing statements from the Massei trial? Specifically Nov 20, 2009?? The 8-hour long diatribe??
I don't think so :((:
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:31 pm

Hans wrote:
KayPea wrote:Has anyone located Mignini's closing statements from the Massei trial? Specifically Nov 20, 2009?? The 8-hour long diatribe??
I don't think so :((:


Thanks, hopefully that will surface one day.
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby pmop57 » Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:05 pm

KayPea wrote:
Hans wrote:
KayPea wrote:Has anyone located Mignini's closing statements from the Massei trial? Specifically Nov 20, 2009?? The 8-hour long diatribe??
I don't think so :((:


Thanks, hopefully that will surface one day.


Important also the Guede interrogation transcript (interrogation in Capane).
pmop57
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sun Jul 14, 2013 9:13 am

The pmf wiki has the Testimony of C&V posted in Italian. Here is a Google translation....

C&V testimony.rtf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sun Jul 14, 2013 10:00 am

RoseMontague wrote:The pmf wiki has the Testimony of C&V posted in Italian. Here is a Google translation....

C&V testimony.rtf


Awesome, thanks Rose!
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:13 am

Hans, do you think you can give me a good OCR of this one? Supposedly Migi's closing at first trial.

requisitoria-PM.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 am

RoseMontague wrote:Hans, do you think you can give me a good OCR of this one? Supposedly Migi's closing at first trial.

requisitoria-PM.pdf

I'm on it...
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:15 pm

Hans wrote:
RoseMontague wrote:Hans, do you think you can give me a good OCR of this one? Supposedly Migi's closing at first trial.

requisitoria-PM.pdf

I'm on it...


Awesome if it is, I've been looking for the full account. Good work you two.
:worthy:
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:48 pm

I was curious as I looked over the doc why these parts were bolded and in italics. Mignini is complaining about Doug Preston. Wow, talk about sour grapes.

No, sono andati oltre: hanno attaccato in manier indecorosa, con assoluta carenza di argomenti e con impressionante superficialita il sistema giudiziario di questo Stato, l'unico, ricordo, avente giurisdizione su questa vicenda.

Ma non basta ancora: supporiati da qualche noto giallista, totalmente sprovvisto di cultura giuridica specie degli ordinamenti stranieri e terrorizzato da inesistenti provvedimenti di espulision o di arresto nei suoi confronti (che esistono solo nella sua indubbiamente fervida fantasia di scrittore) e sostenitore fideistico di teorie investigative ormai definitivamente sconfessate a livello giudiziario e calunniose per innocenti, hanno cercato di legare strumentalmente questo delitto di Perugia a vicende criminali efferate e crudeli, quanto inquietanti, inquinate e sordide, accadute non lontano da qui e le ramificazioni locali di tali vicende.


No, they went further: they attacked in an unseemly, with absolute lack of arguments and impressive superficiality the judicial system of this state, the only one, I remember, having jurisdiction over this matter.

But it is not yet enough supporiati from some well-known crime writer, who is totally without legal culture species of foreign legal systems and terrorized by nonexistent measures espulision or for his arrest (which undoubtedly exist only in his fertile imagination of writer) and supporter of faith-based theories investigative now definitively repudiated at the judicial level and slanderous for innocent, they tried to tie instrumentally this crime of Perugia heinous and cruel crime stories, as disturbing, polluted and sordid, happened not far from here and the local ramifications of these events.
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby sept79 » Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:04 pm

The insincerity of Italian justice knows no bounds.

Insincerity: The quality of not being open or truthful; deceitful or hypocritical.
sept79
 
Posts: 1406
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 7:16 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:05 pm

KayPea wrote:
Hans wrote:
RoseMontague wrote:Hans, do you think you can give me a good OCR of this one? Supposedly Migi's closing at first trial.

requisitoria-PM.pdf

I'm on it...


Awesome if it is, I've been looking for the full account. Good work you two.
:worthy:

This one needs a lot of proofreading, but it looks like the closing arguments to the Micheli Court to me:
Signor Giudice dell'udienza preliminare, la Procura deve trarre le sue conclusioni, a questa udienza,
in relazione ad un delitto la cui gravità ed efferatezza è ben testimoniata dallo straordinario interesse
che questo tragico episodio ha suscitato possiamo dire, nel mondo intero.

google translation wrote:Mr. Preliminary Hearings Judge, the prosecutor has to draw his own conclusions, at this hearing, in relation to a crime whose severity and brutality is well documented by the extraordinary interest that this tragic incident has sparked we can say, in the whole world.
Quite a lot of interesting stuff (Thank You Image!) like quotes from the English girls and the Italian friends. (btw. page 62 seems to be missing :((: ) I'm working on it... :clue:
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:15 pm

KayPea wrote:I was curious as I looked over the doc why these parts were bolded and in italics. Mignini is complaining about Doug Preston. Wow, talk about sour grapes.

No, sono andati oltre: hanno attaccato in manier indecorosa, con assoluta carenza di argomenti e con impressionante superficialita il sistema giudiziario di questo Stato, l'unico, ricordo, avente giurisdizione su questa vicenda.

Ma non basta ancora: supporiati da qualche noto giallista, totalmente sprovvisto di cultura giuridica specie degli ordinamenti stranieri e terrorizzato da inesistenti provvedimenti di espulision o di arresto nei suoi confronti (che esistono solo nella sua indubbiamente fervida fantasia di scrittore) e sostenitore fideistico di teorie investigative ormai definitivamente sconfessate a livello giudiziario e calunniose per innocenti, hanno cercato di legare strumentalmente questo delitto di Perugia a vicende criminali efferate e crudeli, quanto inquietanti, inquinate e sordide, accadute non lontano da qui e le ramificazioni locali di tali vicende.


No, they went further: they attacked in an unseemly, with absolute lack of arguments and impressive superficiality the judicial system of this state, the only one, I remember, having jurisdiction over this matter.

But it is not yet enough supporiati from some well-known crime writer, who is totally without legal culture species of foreign legal systems and terrorized by nonexistent measures espulision or for his arrest (which undoubtedly exist only in his fertile imagination of writer) and supporter of faith-based theories investigative now definitively repudiated at the judicial level and slanderous for innocent, they tried to tie instrumentally this crime of Perugia heinous and cruel crime stories, as disturbing, polluted and sordid, happened not far from here and the local ramifications of these events.


Lord have mercy. I wonder if the rest of it is ranting and raving like this.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:21 pm

RoseMontague wrote:
KayPea wrote:I was curious as I looked over the doc why these parts were bolded and in italics. Mignini is complaining about Doug Preston. Wow, talk about sour grapes.

No, sono andati oltre: hanno attaccato in manier indecorosa, con assoluta carenza di argomenti e con impressionante superficialita il sistema giudiziario di questo Stato, l'unico, ricordo, avente giurisdizione su questa vicenda.

Ma non basta ancora: supporiati da qualche noto giallista, totalmente sprovvisto di cultura giuridica specie degli ordinamenti stranieri e terrorizzato da inesistenti provvedimenti di espulision o di arresto nei suoi confronti (che esistono solo nella sua indubbiamente fervida fantasia di scrittore) e sostenitore fideistico di teorie investigative ormai definitivamente sconfessate a livello giudiziario e calunniose per innocenti, hanno cercato di legare strumentalmente questo delitto di Perugia a vicende criminali efferate e crudeli, quanto inquietanti, inquinate e sordide, accadute non lontano da qui e le ramificazioni locali di tali vicende.


No, they went further: they attacked in an unseemly, with absolute lack of arguments and impressive superficiality the judicial system of this state, the only one, I remember, having jurisdiction over this matter.

But it is not yet enough supporiati from some well-known crime writer, who is totally without legal culture species of foreign legal systems and terrorized by nonexistent measures espulision or for his arrest (which undoubtedly exist only in his fertile imagination of writer) and supporter of faith-based theories investigative now definitively repudiated at the judicial level and slanderous for innocent, they tried to tie instrumentally this crime of Perugia heinous and cruel crime stories, as disturbing, polluted and sordid, happened not far from here and the local ramifications of these events.


Lord have mercy. I wonder if the rest of it is ranting and raving like this.


It's my understand that Mignini ranted and raved for 8 hours that day, which is why I want to see his closing arguments. The whole fantasy is there.
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:06 am

Rose where did you find this document?
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Sat Jul 27, 2013 10:58 am

The (cleaned up) first part:
Signor Giudice dell'udienza preliminare, la Procura deve trarre le sue conclusioni, a questa udienza, in relazione ad un delitto la cui gravità ed efferatezza è ben testimoniata dallo straordinario interesse che questo tragico episodio ha suscitato, possiamo dire, nel mondo intero.

Si è parlato di "delitto globale”, per alludere ad una vicenda che ha coinvolto emotivamente l'opinione pubblica nazionale ed internazionale, specie, in quest'ultimo caso, in quest'ultimo aggettivo (internazionale), quelle dei paesi di lingua anglosassone a cui apparteneva la vittima, la giovane Kercher Meredith Susana Cara e appartiene l'imputata Amanda Knox.

È una vicenda giudiziaria che si è svolta e continua ad esserlo, sotto i riflettori mediatici di mezzo mondo, con tutti i problemi che questo ha comportato.

Glì organi d'informazione esercitano un'attività fondamentale e imprescindibile in un ordinamento democratico. Debbo dire che, salve alcune eccezioni, gli stessi, sia italiani che stranieri, hanno svolto egregiamente un'attività che deve contemperarsi, e non è affatto facile, con l'opposta e parimenti imprescindibile esigenza della segretezza degli atti d'indagine.

Non si può ignorare, però, che vi sono stati interventi anomali, lesivi, spesso gravemente, dei diritti individuali e, purtroppo, numerose violazioni del segreto investigativo che hanno arrecato non pochi danni alle indagini perché la violazione del precetto di cui all'art. 326 C.P. si porta dietro, come elemento indefettibile, un pregiudizio all'attività d'indagine e, spesso, un danno incalcolabile a chi è stato colpito da un dolore che nessuna statuizione giudiziaria potrà colmare e agli stessi indagati e imputati.

All'udienza preliminare, nel corso dell'escussione del teste Barrow ma anche di quella di Kokomani, è emerso un fenomeno scandaloso, quello del mercimonio avente ad oggetto atti processuali e in particolare audizioni di persone informate sui fatti: di fronte a offerte di denaro per rendere interviste o per partecipare a trasmissioni televisive, vi è chi si è correttamente rifiutato di prestarsi a profferte così vergognose e chi addirittura l'ha sollecitata. Ma dall'altra parte, vi è stato sempre il tentativo di spostare la "gestione" della vicenda su canali extraprocessuali, spesso al fine di demolire il lavoro degli inquirenti e l'accertamento della verità dei fatti.

Non possono tacersi, inoltre, gli attacchi strumentali e inqualificabili che sono stati rivolti agli inquirenti, specialmente agli organi di Polizia giudiziaria e sul servizio di Polizia scientifica della Direzione Centrale Anticrimine della Polizia di Stato, da chi ha approfittato del vincolo assoluto del riserbo che grava sugli inquirenti stessi e dell'opposta, libera possibilità per difensori e CC.TT. delle parti private e "difensori" di supporto delle stesse, di partecipare ad ogni genere di trasmissioni e rendere tutte le interviste e dichiarazioni che abbiano inteso rendere.

Si è tentato di arrivare ad una "cognizzazione", mi si perdoni il neologismo, del delitto di Perugia, per alludere non all'esito giudiziale del procedimento, ma al ''processo mediatico" del delitto del piccolo Samuele.

Spesso, qualche organo d'informazione o qualche "esperto" o "cultore", nazionale o non, che non conosceva una virgola degli atti del procedimento, ignorando disinvoltamente, presuntuosamente e superficialmente (miscela esplosiva !), com'è ormai costume, che le indagini le fanno i Pubblici Ministeri e la Polizia giudiziaria e che vanno rispettate le statuizioni ormai immodificabili dell’Autorittà giudiziaria, ha parlato, a proposito del delitto di Perugia, di un "caso irrisolto" (mi è capitato spesso di sentirlo così definire in televisione), come altri delitti (come ad esempio, quello di Garlasco), cercando di portare "acqua" al mulino di qualcuno degli imputati a discapito di altri.

Tralascio gli anomali interventi dei genitori e parenti dei due imputati, interventi che possono anche comprendersi ma che hanno espresso la più totale ignoranza delle norme processuali e sostanziali e dell'andamento stesso delle indagini.

Ma, certi ambienti e non, spesso d'oltreoceano, non si sono fermati a questo .... la presunzione è una malattia molto diffusa contro cui non esistono cure, purtroppo, quando ad essa si associa, immancabile, la superficialità.

No, sono andati oltre: hanno attaccato in maniera indecorosa, con assoluta carenza di argomenti e con impressionante superficialità il sistema giudiziario di questo Stato, l'unico, ricordo, avente giurisdizione su questa vicenda.

Ma non basta ancora: supportati da qualche noto giallista, totalmente sprovvisto di cultura giuridica specie degli ordinamenti stranieri e terrorizzato da inesistenti provvedimenti di espulsione o di arresto nei sui confronti (che esistono solo nella sua indubbiamente fervida fantasia di scrittore) e sostenitore
fideistico di teorie investigative ormai definitivamente sconfessate a livello giudiziario e calunniose per innocenti, hanno cercato di legare strumentalmente questo delitto di Perugia a vicende criminali efferate e crudeli, quanto inquietanti, inquinate e sordide, accadute non lontano da qui e le ramificazioni locali di tali vicende. Gli stessi si sono letteralmente inventati riferimenti a non ben definite "ipotesi cospirative" per spiegare il coinvolgimento giudiziario della Knox e del Sollecito, accanto al (secondo loro) unico e vero responsabile, il ragazzo di colore, come se per questi personaggi i delitti si dovessero commettere sempre e soltanto da singoli e non esistessero crimini commessi da consorzi criminali (cito, tra tutti, quelli di "Cosa Nostra"), se non in prospettive "di cospirazione", che non ho ancora capito con esattezza cosa significhi e a cosa alluda. 1 riferimenti a queste "teorie" li ho letti in uno strano blog aperto in coincidenza con il due novembre 07. Questo accade quando si pretende di accostarsi alla variegata realtà criminale del nostro tempo con l'ottica deformante degli schemi preconcetti su cui far rientrare per forza la realtà, aprioristicamente "cospirazionisti" o aprioristicamente"anticospirazionisti" poco importa.

Ovviamente, le menti di tale operazione stanno, però, in Italia, non negli Stati Uniti.

Hanno detto, per lo più da 9.000 cliilometri di distanza, meno frequentemente da 5.000, senza conoscere forse nemmeno una parola degli atti del procedimento nè la complessità del linguaggio giuridico italiano : abbiamo capito tutto. Da qui, abbiamo capito tutto: c'è un solo responsabile, il ragazzo di colore, gli altri non c'entrano. Ve lo diciamo noi.

Io sono rimasto scandalizzato e sconcertata da questo atteggiamento. È la prima volta che mi ci sono imbattuto e non credo che mi troverò ancora di fronte a tanta presunzione e superficialità.

Un minimo di esperienza, di prudenza, di accortezza dovrebbe impedire simili giudizi sommari, espressi da 5.000, ma più spesso addirittura da 9.000 chilometri di distanza.

E tutto questo senza spendere una sola parola sul fatto che le ordinanze custodiali siano state confermate in tutti i loro presupposti dal Tribunale del Riesame e dalla Prima Sezione penale della Suprema Corte !

Sorvolo su altri, ancora più gravi, incredibili e reiterati episodi d'interferenza. Mi limito a dire che sarebbero inconcepibili in Italia e non siamo certo un paese perfetto.

Noi italiani, come tutti i popoli di questo mondo, chi più chi meno, abbiamo i nostri difetti. E uno di
essi, secondo me, il maggiore e il più limitante, è l'esterofilia e l'autocommiserazione, gravissimo limite: l'idea che gli altri facciano sempre meglio e che i sistemi degli altri siano migliori e debbano per forza essere imitati. La realtà e l'esperienza di questa vicenda giudiziario - mediatica dovrebbe suggerire invece maggiore realismo e discernimento.

Credo, infatti, che pregi e difetti siano diffusi tra tutti i popoli di questo mondo e che ognuno debba dotarsi dei sistemi, specie giudiziari, conformi alla propria identità e alla propria storia, senza imitare per forza gli altri.

Nessuno, in Italia, si sarebbe permesso di denigrare ed attaccare con tanta impudenza e sfacciataggine gli inquirenti, ad esempio, statunitensi. Da noi c’è lo sport, ormai sempre più in voga, di attaccare comunque e dovunque i magistrati italiani, specie del Pubblico Ministero, ma a nessun giornalista, ad esempio, italiano, a nessun operatore giuridico italiano verrebbe in mente di diffamare e calunniare un Pubblico Ministero americano che stia indagando su un imputato italiano. A nessuno e giustamente. A questi, si, eccome ! E non solo il Pubblico Ministero ma anche il GIP, anche il Tribunale del Riesame e anche i giudici della Corte Suprema che hanno condiviso in pieno tutti i presupposti delle ordinanze di custodia cautelare !

E oggi, su queste ordinanze e sentenze, è calata la pietra tombale (per gli imputati) della definitività ed incontestabilità.

Si potranno condividere o meno, ma nessuno, in Italia e altrove può permettersi di affermare che contro i due imputati Knox e Sollecito (che sono quelli per cui si batte la grancassa mediatica) non vi siano elementi che giustifichino la custodia cautelare e che l'unico che meriti la prigione sia il “cattivo"di turno, il ragazzo di colore che non gode evidentemente di tanti sponsor a livello internazionale.

Si è cercata la rissa...la provocazione, sperando che da essa potesse giungere qualcosa di positivo per la Knox ed il Sollecito e perché si potesse scaricare tutto sul ragazzo di colore alla cui difesa va il merito di un'assoluta correttezza professionale.

Si è cercato di togliere di mezzo, attraverso la calunnia, da questi degni discepoli di Don Basilio, non solo gli uomini e le donne della Squadra Mobile che hanno svolto egregiamente il loro compito, si è cercato, addirittura, di togliere di mezzo in questa, ma soprattutto in altre vicende giudiziarie, il
Pubblico Ministero, ma nessuno si faccia illusioni: nessuno ha abbandonato e abbandonerà mai il suo posto. Sia molto chiaro a tutti, a Perugia e altrove.

Eppure, nonostante la difficoltà, quasi l'impossibilità di lavorare con serenità e tranquillità, nonostante tutti gli ostacoli e le turbative, nonostante le mine vaganti di questo e di altro procedimento che si è voluto legare al primo, sono stati necessari solo otto mesi per concludere le indagini, inviare gli avvisi ex art. 415 bis c.p.p. e richiedere il rinvio a giudizio dei tre imputati e le misure cautelari, come s'è detto, ma va ripetuto, sono state tutte puntualmente e rigorosamente confermate dal Tribunale del Riesame e dalla Suprema Corte, cosa che, troppo spesso, i detrattori, italiani e non, delle indagini, hanno disinvoltamente occultato e passato sotto silenzio.

E come non sottolineare la compostezza e il riserbo che in questi mesi, in questi difficili mesi, hanno invece caratterizzato i familiari della giovane ragazza uccisa (la conferma di uno stile di vita che caratterizzava lei e le sue più strette amiche e che emerso dagli atti): nessuno potrà ridare a loro quella giovane simpatica e amante della vita che noi abbiamo imparato a conoscere dalle foto e dai ricordi dei familiari e delle amiche, quella ragazza che in fondo era amata da pressoché tutti coloro che la conoscevano, che amava profondamente questa città e il panorama, splendido, che poteva ammirarsi da quell'appartamento nel quale era felice di trascorrere la sua esperienza italiana e perugina, in attesa di tornare a Londra per il compleanno della madre a cui Meredith, Mez per gli amici, era tanto affezionata. Da loro, dalla madre, dal padre, dai fratelli non abbiamo visto altro che un dolore incolmabile e l'attesa fiduciosa di giustizia. Non un gesto né una parola inutile, stonata e fuori posto....

È una premessa d'obbligo, a difesa dei miei collaboratori, dell'ufficio a cui appartengo e della vittima di questo efferato delitto.

Oggi, noi siamo davanti a Lei per la stessa vicenda ma in relazione a due istituti processuali diversi tra loro.

Da una parte, c'è il giudizio abbreviato richiesto dall’imputato Rudy Herman Guede, un giudizio che, a prescindere del l'esito degli esami testimonial i svolti, dovrà basarsi sugli atti dell’indagine e nel quale Lei Signor Giudice dell’udienza preliminare dovrà decidere nel merito.

Dall'altra, c'e l'udienza preliminare classica, per gli altri due imputati, che dovrà concludersi con una statuizione meramente processuale, non di merito, concernente la utilità e la necessità del giudizio o
l'inutilità di un giudizio, sulla base, rispettivamente, della presenza o meno di elementi che impongano l'approfondimento e la verifica dibattimentali dell'accusa.
google translates quite nicely... ;-)

But here is this gem from the second part which deals with Rudy Guede:
L'odierno imputato Guede, soprannominato "Il Barone", era già stato, infatti, indicato da Stefano Bonassi nel p. v. di s.i. del 4.11.07 (nel quale aveva, tra l'altro, riferito dell'abitudine di Rudi di non scaricare il water dalle feci) e da Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick il 13.11.07.
Can someone please explain the abbreviations p. v. and s.i. to me?
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:09 pm

The (cleaned up) first part:

Mr. preliminary hearing judge, the prosecutor must draw his own conclusions, at this hearing, in relation to a crime whose severity and brutality is well evidenced by the extraordinary interest that this tragic incident has aroused, we can say, in the whole world.

There was talk of "global crime," alluding to a story that has emotionally involved national and international public opinion, especially in the latter case, in the latter adjective (International), those of English-speaking countries in he belonged to the victim, the young Kercher Meredith Susanna Cara and belongs to the defendant Amanda Knox.

It is a court case that took place and continues to be, under the media spotlight over the world, with all the problems that this has involved.

The media exercising a fundamental and indispensable in a democratic order. I must say that, subject to certain exceptions, the same, both Italian and foreign, have played a task that must balance each other very well, and it is not easy, with the opposite and equally essential need for secrecy of investigation reports.

You can not ignore, however, that there were other interventions abnormal, harmful, often severely, individual rights and, unfortunately, numerous violations of the secret investigation, which caused some damage to the investigation because the violation of the precept of art. 326 Č.p. brings with it, as an element unfailing, a bias to the activity of investigation and often incalculable damage to those affected by pain that no judicial ruling will fill and the same suspects and defendants.

At the preliminary hearing, during the questioning of the witness Barrow but also that of Kokomani, there was a scandalous phenomenon, that of commercialization concerning pleadings and in particular questioning of persons informed about the facts: faced with offers of money to make interviews or to participate in television programs, there is one who has correctly refused to lend itself to advances so shameful and who has even solicited. But on the other hand, there has always been an attempt to move the "management" of the story of extraprocessuali channels, often in order to demolish the work of the investigators and the ascertainment of the truth of the facts.

They can not keep silent also instrumental attacks and unspeakable that were addressed to the investigators, especially the organs of the Judicial Police and the service of the Scientific Police of the Central Anti-Crime Police State, who took advantage of the bond's absolute discretion burden on the investigators themselves and the opposite, free opportunity for defenders and CC.TT. private parties and "defenders" of supporting them, to participate in all kinds of transmissions and make all the interviews and statements which they intended to make.

An attempt was made to arrive at a "cognizzazione", if you will pardon the neologism, the murder in Perugia, not to allude to the outcome of the judicial proceedings, but to the'' media trial "of the murder of the boy Samuel.

Often, some media outlet or some "expert" or "lover", national or not, he did not know one iota of procedural documents, ignoring casually, presumptuously and superficially (explosive mixture!), As has become custom, that investigations are performed by the prosecutors and the police and judicial rulings that must be complied with by now unchangeable dell'Autorittà judicial, talked, about the murder in Perugia, a "cold case" (I happened to hear it so often define television), like other crimes (such as, that of Garlasco), trying to bring "water" to the mill of some of the defendants at the expense of others.

I omit the abnormal actions of the parents and relatives of the two defendants, interventions that can also understand but who expressed complete ignorance of procedural rules and substantive and the performance of the same investigation.

However, certain sectors and not, often overseas, have not stopped to this .... the presumption is a widespread disease against which there is no cure, unfortunately, when it is associated with it, inevitable, superficiality.

No, they went further: they attacked in an unseemly, with absolute lack of arguments and impressive superficiality the judicial system of this state, the only one, I remember, having jurisdiction over this matter.

But it is not yet enough supported by some well-known crime writer, who is totally without legal culture species of foreign legal systems and terrorized by nonexistent expulsion or arrest on comparisons (which undoubtedly exist only in his fertile imagination of writer) and supporter
faith-based theories of investigative now definitively repudiated at the judicial level and slanderous for innocent, they tried to tie instrumentally this crime of Perugia heinous and cruel crime stories, as disturbing, polluted and sordid, happened not far from here and the ramifications of such local events . In particular, they are literally invented references to ill-defined "conspiracy theories" to explain the involvement of the judiciary Knox and Sollecito, next to (according to them) and only really in charge of the boy of color, as if these characters for the crimes they should commit always and only by individuals and there were no crimes committed by criminal associations (and I, of all people, those of "Cosa Nostra"), except in perspectives "conspiracy", which I have not yet figured out exactly what it means and what it alludes . 1 References to these "theories" I've read in a strange blog open to coincide with November 2 07. This happens when one attempts to approach the varied criminal reality of our time with the lens distorting the preconceived notions on which to indent to force reality, a priori "conspiracy" or a priori "anticospirazionisti" does not matter.

Obviously, the minds of this operation are, however, in Italy, not in the United States.

They said, mostly from 9,000 cliilometri away, less frequently from 5000, perhaps even without knowing a word of the pleadings nor the complexity of the Italian legal language: we have it all figured out. From here, we have it all figured out: there is only one person in charge, the black guy, the others have nothing to do. We'll tell you.

I am still shocked and appalled by this attitude. This is the first time I came across it and I do not think I will find myself again in front of such presumption and superficiality.

A minimum of experience, prudence, caution should prevent similar summaries, cast by 5000, but more often even from 9,000 miles away.

And all this without spending a single word about the fact that the custodial orders have been confirmed in all their assumptions by the Court of Review and the First Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court!

Overflight of other, more serious, incredible and repeated episodes of interference. I will just say that would be inconceivable in Italy and we are certainly not a perfect country.

We Italians, like all peoples of this world, some more than others, we have our flaws. And one of
they, in my opinion, the greatest and the most limiting, is the xenophilia and self-pity, very serious limitation: the idea that others do better and that the systems are better and the other must necessarily be imitated. The reality and the experience of this story justice - media should suggest rather more realistic and discernment.

Indeed, I believe that good and bad are widely distributed among all the peoples of this world and that everyone should adopt the systems, especially courts, in conformity with its own identity and its own history, without necessarily imitating others.

No one in Italy, one would have dared to vilify and attack with such impudence and shamelessness to investigators, for example, U.S.. With us there is sport, now more and more in vogue, to attack wherever and however the Italian magistrates, especially the Public Prosecutor, but no journalist, for example, Italian, no operator in the Italian legal system would think to defame and slander an American prosecutor who is investigating an accused Italian. No one and rightly so. To these, yes! And not only the prosecutor but also the GIP, even the Court of Review and the judges of the Supreme Court who have shared in full all the conditions of custody orders!

And today, on these ordinances and judgments, has dropped the tombstone (for the defendants) of the definitive and incontestable.

You can share or not, but no one in Italy and elsewhere can afford to say that the two defendants against Knox and Sollecito (which are those for which one beats the drum media) there is evidence to justify pre-trial detention and that ' only one who deserves prison is the "bad guy", the black guy who does not enjoy obviously many sponsors at the international level.

He searches for the fight ... the provocation, hoping that it could reach something positive for the Knox and Sollecito and why you could download all the colored boy whose defense has the merit of an absolute professional integrity.

We have tried to get rid of, through slander, by these worthy disciples of Don Basilio, not only men and women of the squad that played their role very well, we tried even to get rid of this but especially in other legal proceedings, the
Public Ministry, but no one delude himself: no one has abandoned and never leave his place. Be very clear to everyone, in Perugia and elsewhere.

Yet, despite the difficulty, almost impossible to work with serenity and tranquility, despite all the obstacles and disturbances, despite the loose cannons of this and other legal proceedings that we wanted to tie in the first, it took only eight months to conclude the investigation, send alerts pursuant to Art. 415 bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure and request the trial of the three defendants and precautionary measures, as has been said, but it must be repeated, were all on time and strictly upheld by the Court of Review and the Supreme Court, which, too often, detractors, Italian and not, investigation, have concealed and casually passed over in silence.

And how can we emphasize the composure and restraint in recent months, in these difficult months, have instead characterized the family of the young girl who was killed (the confirmation of a lifestyle that characterized her and her friends and destination that emerged from the documents ): no one will give them that young sympathetic and lover of life that we have come to know from the photos and memories of family members and friends, that girl who was really loved by almost everyone who knew her, he loved deeply this city ​​and landscape, splendid, he could admire from that apartment in which he was happy to spend his Italian experience and Perugia, waiting to return to London for his mother's birthday that Meredith, Mez for friends, was so fond . From them, by his mother, his father and brothers we have not seen more than a pain unbridgeable and confident expectation of justice. Not a gesture or a word useless, out of tune and out of place ....

It is a premise must, in defense of my staff, the office to which I belong, and the victim of this heinous crime.

Today, we are in front of you for the same story but in relation to two institutions procedural different.

On the one hand, there is the summary judgment requested by the accused Rudy Herman Guede, an opinion that, regardless of the outcome of the examinations carried out the testimonial, it must be based on the acts of the investigation and in which you Mr. Judge hearing Preliminary will have to decide on the merits.

On the other hand, there is a preliminary hearing classical, for the other two defendants, which must be completed with a ruling merely procedural, not substantive, concerning the usefulness and necessity of the judgment or
the futility of a judgment, based on, respectively, the presence or absence of elements that require the deepening and testing dibattimentali prosecution.
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:12 pm

It's interesting to see the length this speaker, if it is Mignini, goes to in defending the stance that foreigners should not be taking issue with what happened in Perugia by writing and blogging about it.
Humph!
:facepalm:
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby RoseMontague » Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:27 pm

KayPea wrote:Rose where did you find this document?


It is posted on Raffaele's website, kinda just sitting there unnoticed for some reason. I believe he refers to it as Mignini's closing from the first trial.

I hope he posts a few more documents.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:43 pm

RoseMontague wrote:
KayPea wrote:Rose where did you find this document?


It is posted on Raffaele's website, kinda just sitting there unnoticed for some reason. I believe he refers to it as Mignini's closing from the first trial.

I hope he posts a few more documents.


Thanks and Yeah, that would be nice!!
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sat Jul 27, 2013 5:02 pm

Hans wrote:The (cleaned up) first part:
Signor Giudice dell'udienza preliminare, la Procura deve trarre le sue conclusioni, a questa udienza, in relazione ad un delitto la cui gravità ed efferatezza è ben testimoniata dallo straordinario interesse che questo tragico episodio ha suscitato, possiamo dire, nel mondo intero.

Si è parlato di "delitto globale”, per alludere ad una vicenda che ha coinvolto emotivamente l'opinione pubblica nazionale ed internazionale, specie, in quest'ultimo caso, in quest'ultimo aggettivo (internazionale), quelle dei paesi di lingua anglosassone a cui apparteneva la vittima, la giovane Kercher Meredith Susana Cara e appartiene l'imputata Amanda Knox.

È una vicenda giudiziaria che si è svolta e continua ad esserlo, sotto i riflettori mediatici di mezzo mondo, con tutti i problemi che questo ha comportato.

Glì organi d'informazione esercitano un'attività fondamentale e imprescindibile in un ordinamento democratico. Debbo dire che, salve alcune eccezioni, gli stessi, sia italiani che stranieri, hanno svolto egregiamente un'attività che deve contemperarsi, e non è affatto facile, con l'opposta e parimenti imprescindibile esigenza della segretezza degli atti d'indagine.

Non si può ignorare, però, che vi sono stati interventi anomali, lesivi, spesso gravemente, dei diritti individuali e, purtroppo, numerose violazioni del segreto investigativo che hanno arrecato non pochi danni alle indagini perché la violazione del precetto di cui all'art. 326 C.P. si porta dietro, come elemento indefettibile, un pregiudizio all'attività d'indagine e, spesso, un danno incalcolabile a chi è stato colpito da un dolore che nessuna statuizione giudiziaria potrà colmare e agli stessi indagati e imputati.

All'udienza preliminare, nel corso dell'escussione del teste Barrow ma anche di quella di Kokomani, è emerso un fenomeno scandaloso, quello del mercimonio avente ad oggetto atti processuali e in particolare audizioni di persone informate sui fatti: di fronte a offerte di denaro per rendere interviste o per partecipare a trasmissioni televisive, vi è chi si è correttamente rifiutato di prestarsi a profferte così vergognose e chi addirittura l'ha sollecitata. Ma dall'altra parte, vi è stato sempre il tentativo di spostare la "gestione" della vicenda su canali extraprocessuali, spesso al fine di demolire il lavoro degli inquirenti e l'accertamento della verità dei fatti.

Non possono tacersi, inoltre, gli attacchi strumentali e inqualificabili che sono stati rivolti agli inquirenti, specialmente agli organi di Polizia giudiziaria e sul servizio di Polizia scientifica della Direzione Centrale Anticrimine della Polizia di Stato, da chi ha approfittato del vincolo assoluto del riserbo che grava sugli inquirenti stessi e dell'opposta, libera possibilità per difensori e CC.TT. delle parti private e "difensori" di supporto delle stesse, di partecipare ad ogni genere di trasmissioni e rendere tutte le interviste e dichiarazioni che abbiano inteso rendere.

Si è tentato di arrivare ad una "cognizzazione", mi si perdoni il neologismo, del delitto di Perugia, per alludere non all'esito giudiziale del procedimento, ma al ''processo mediatico" del delitto del piccolo Samuele.

Spesso, qualche organo d'informazione o qualche "esperto" o "cultore", nazionale o non, che non conosceva una virgola degli atti del procedimento, ignorando disinvoltamente, presuntuosamente e superficialmente (miscela esplosiva !), com'è ormai costume, che le indagini le fanno i Pubblici Ministeri e la Polizia giudiziaria e che vanno rispettate le statuizioni ormai immodificabili dell’Autorittà giudiziaria, ha parlato, a proposito del delitto di Perugia, di un "caso irrisolto" (mi è capitato spesso di sentirlo così definire in televisione), come altri delitti (come ad esempio, quello di Garlasco), cercando di portare "acqua" al mulino di qualcuno degli imputati a discapito di altri.

Tralascio gli anomali interventi dei genitori e parenti dei due imputati, interventi che possono anche comprendersi ma che hanno espresso la più totale ignoranza delle norme processuali e sostanziali e dell'andamento stesso delle indagini.

Ma, certi ambienti e non, spesso d'oltreoceano, non si sono fermati a questo .... la presunzione è una malattia molto diffusa contro cui non esistono cure, purtroppo, quando ad essa si associa, immancabile, la superficialità.

No, sono andati oltre: hanno attaccato in maniera indecorosa, con assoluta carenza di argomenti e con impressionante superficialità il sistema giudiziario di questo Stato, l'unico, ricordo, avente giurisdizione su questa vicenda.

Ma non basta ancora: supportati da qualche noto giallista, totalmente sprovvisto di cultura giuridica specie degli ordinamenti stranieri e terrorizzato da inesistenti provvedimenti di espulsione o di arresto nei sui confronti (che esistono solo nella sua indubbiamente fervida fantasia di scrittore) e sostenitore
fideistico di teorie investigative ormai definitivamente sconfessate a livello giudiziario e calunniose per innocenti, hanno cercato di legare strumentalmente questo delitto di Perugia a vicende criminali efferate e crudeli, quanto inquietanti, inquinate e sordide, accadute non lontano da qui e le ramificazioni locali di tali vicende. Gli stessi si sono letteralmente inventati riferimenti a non ben definite "ipotesi cospirative" per spiegare il coinvolgimento giudiziario della Knox e del Sollecito, accanto al (secondo loro) unico e vero responsabile, il ragazzo di colore, come se per questi personaggi i delitti si dovessero commettere sempre e soltanto da singoli e non esistessero crimini commessi da consorzi criminali (cito, tra tutti, quelli di "Cosa Nostra"), se non in prospettive "di cospirazione", che non ho ancora capito con esattezza cosa significhi e a cosa alluda. 1 riferimenti a queste "teorie" li ho letti in uno strano blog aperto in coincidenza con il due novembre 07. Questo accade quando si pretende di accostarsi alla variegata realtà criminale del nostro tempo con l'ottica deformante degli schemi preconcetti su cui far rientrare per forza la realtà, aprioristicamente "cospirazionisti" o aprioristicamente"anticospirazionisti" poco importa.

Ovviamente, le menti di tale operazione stanno, però, in Italia, non negli Stati Uniti.

Hanno detto, per lo più da 9.000 cliilometri di distanza, meno frequentemente da 5.000, senza conoscere forse nemmeno una parola degli atti del procedimento nè la complessità del linguaggio giuridico italiano : abbiamo capito tutto. Da qui, abbiamo capito tutto: c'è un solo responsabile, il ragazzo di colore, gli altri non c'entrano. Ve lo diciamo noi.

Io sono rimasto scandalizzato e sconcertata da questo atteggiamento. È la prima volta che mi ci sono imbattuto e non credo che mi troverò ancora di fronte a tanta presunzione e superficialità.

Un minimo di esperienza, di prudenza, di accortezza dovrebbe impedire simili giudizi sommari, espressi da 5.000, ma più spesso addirittura da 9.000 chilometri di distanza.

E tutto questo senza spendere una sola parola sul fatto che le ordinanze custodiali siano state confermate in tutti i loro presupposti dal Tribunale del Riesame e dalla Prima Sezione penale della Suprema Corte !

Sorvolo su altri, ancora più gravi, incredibili e reiterati episodi d'interferenza. Mi limito a dire che sarebbero inconcepibili in Italia e non siamo certo un paese perfetto.

Noi italiani, come tutti i popoli di questo mondo, chi più chi meno, abbiamo i nostri difetti. E uno di
essi, secondo me, il maggiore e il più limitante, è l'esterofilia e l'autocommiserazione, gravissimo limite: l'idea che gli altri facciano sempre meglio e che i sistemi degli altri siano migliori e debbano per forza essere imitati. La realtà e l'esperienza di questa vicenda giudiziario - mediatica dovrebbe suggerire invece maggiore realismo e discernimento.

Credo, infatti, che pregi e difetti siano diffusi tra tutti i popoli di questo mondo e che ognuno debba dotarsi dei sistemi, specie giudiziari, conformi alla propria identità e alla propria storia, senza imitare per forza gli altri.

Nessuno, in Italia, si sarebbe permesso di denigrare ed attaccare con tanta impudenza e sfacciataggine gli inquirenti, ad esempio, statunitensi. Da noi c’è lo sport, ormai sempre più in voga, di attaccare comunque e dovunque i magistrati italiani, specie del Pubblico Ministero, ma a nessun giornalista, ad esempio, italiano, a nessun operatore giuridico italiano verrebbe in mente di diffamare e calunniare un Pubblico Ministero americano che stia indagando su un imputato italiano. A nessuno e giustamente. A questi, si, eccome ! E non solo il Pubblico Ministero ma anche il GIP, anche il Tribunale del Riesame e anche i giudici della Corte Suprema che hanno condiviso in pieno tutti i presupposti delle ordinanze di custodia cautelare !

E oggi, su queste ordinanze e sentenze, è calata la pietra tombale (per gli imputati) della definitività ed incontestabilità.

Si potranno condividere o meno, ma nessuno, in Italia e altrove può permettersi di affermare che contro i due imputati Knox e Sollecito (che sono quelli per cui si batte la grancassa mediatica) non vi siano elementi che giustifichino la custodia cautelare e che l'unico che meriti la prigione sia il “cattivo"di turno, il ragazzo di colore che non gode evidentemente di tanti sponsor a livello internazionale.

Si è cercata la rissa...la provocazione, sperando che da essa potesse giungere qualcosa di positivo per la Knox ed il Sollecito e perché si potesse scaricare tutto sul ragazzo di colore alla cui difesa va il merito di un'assoluta correttezza professionale.

Si è cercato di togliere di mezzo, attraverso la calunnia, da questi degni discepoli di Don Basilio, non solo gli uomini e le donne della Squadra Mobile che hanno svolto egregiamente il loro compito, si è cercato, addirittura, di togliere di mezzo in questa, ma soprattutto in altre vicende giudiziarie, il
Pubblico Ministero, ma nessuno si faccia illusioni: nessuno ha abbandonato e abbandonerà mai il suo posto. Sia molto chiaro a tutti, a Perugia e altrove.

Eppure, nonostante la difficoltà, quasi l'impossibilità di lavorare con serenità e tranquillità, nonostante tutti gli ostacoli e le turbative, nonostante le mine vaganti di questo e di altro procedimento che si è voluto legare al primo, sono stati necessari solo otto mesi per concludere le indagini, inviare gli avvisi ex art. 415 bis c.p.p. e richiedere il rinvio a giudizio dei tre imputati e le misure cautelari, come s'è detto, ma va ripetuto, sono state tutte puntualmente e rigorosamente confermate dal Tribunale del Riesame e dalla Suprema Corte, cosa che, troppo spesso, i detrattori, italiani e non, delle indagini, hanno disinvoltamente occultato e passato sotto silenzio.

E come non sottolineare la compostezza e il riserbo che in questi mesi, in questi difficili mesi, hanno invece caratterizzato i familiari della giovane ragazza uccisa (la conferma di uno stile di vita che caratterizzava lei e le sue più strette amiche e che emerso dagli atti): nessuno potrà ridare a loro quella giovane simpatica e amante della vita che noi abbiamo imparato a conoscere dalle foto e dai ricordi dei familiari e delle amiche, quella ragazza che in fondo era amata da pressoché tutti coloro che la conoscevano, che amava profondamente questa città e il panorama, splendido, che poteva ammirarsi da quell'appartamento nel quale era felice di trascorrere la sua esperienza italiana e perugina, in attesa di tornare a Londra per il compleanno della madre a cui Meredith, Mez per gli amici, era tanto affezionata. Da loro, dalla madre, dal padre, dai fratelli non abbiamo visto altro che un dolore incolmabile e l'attesa fiduciosa di giustizia. Non un gesto né una parola inutile, stonata e fuori posto....

È una premessa d'obbligo, a difesa dei miei collaboratori, dell'ufficio a cui appartengo e della vittima di questo efferato delitto.

Oggi, noi siamo davanti a Lei per la stessa vicenda ma in relazione a due istituti processuali diversi tra loro.

Da una parte, c'è il giudizio abbreviato richiesto dall’imputato Rudy Herman Guede, un giudizio che, a prescindere del l'esito degli esami testimonial i svolti, dovrà basarsi sugli atti dell’indagine e nel quale Lei Signor Giudice dell’udienza preliminare dovrà decidere nel merito.

Dall'altra, c'e l'udienza preliminare classica, per gli altri due imputati, che dovrà concludersi con una statuizione meramente processuale, non di merito, concernente la utilità e la necessità del giudizio o
l'inutilità di un giudizio, sulla base, rispettivamente, della presenza o meno di elementi che impongano l'approfondimento e la verifica dibattimentali dell'accusa.
google translates quite nicely... ;-)

But here is this gem from the second part which deals with Rudy Guede:
L'odierno imputato Guede, soprannominato "Il Barone", era già stato, infatti, indicato da Stefano Bonassi nel p. v. di s.i. del 4.11.07 (nel quale aveva, tra l'altro, riferito dell'abitudine di Rudi di non scaricare il water dalle feci) e da Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick il 13.11.07.
Can someone please explain the abbreviations p. v. and s.i. to me?


Today's accused Guede, nicknamed "The Baron", was already, in fact, indicated by Stefano Bonassi in p. v.. of s.i.of 04/11/07 (in which he had, among other things, reported the habit of Rudi not to flush the toilet with faeces) and the Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick 11/13/07.


Parte V (Part 5) of S.I. (dunno yet) maybe "spettatore informazioni" ???? A witness statement from Nov 4??
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby katy_did » Sun Jul 28, 2013 5:34 am

Hans wrote:But here is this gem from the second part which deals with Rudy Guede:
L'odierno imputato Guede, soprannominato "Il Barone", era già stato, infatti, indicato da Stefano Bonassi nel p. v. di s.i. del 4.11.07 (nel quale aveva, tra l'altro, riferito dell'abitudine di Rudi di non scaricare il water dalle feci) e da Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick il 13.11.07.
Can someone please explain the abbreviations p. v. and s.i. to me?

I think it may be "processo verbale di sommarie informazioni" - in other words the record of Stefano Bonassi's interview on the 4th, his witness statement.
User avatar
katy_did
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:33 am

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby Hans » Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:33 am

katy_did wrote:
Hans wrote:But here is this gem from the second part which deals with Rudy Guede:
L'odierno imputato Guede, soprannominato "Il Barone", era già stato, infatti, indicato da Stefano Bonassi nel p. v. di s.i. del 4.11.07 (nel quale aveva, tra l'altro, riferito dell'abitudine di Rudi di non scaricare il water dalle feci) e da Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick il 13.11.07.
Can someone please explain the abbreviations p. v. and s.i. to me?

I think it may be "processo verbale di sommarie informazioni" - in other words the record of Stefano Bonassi's interview on the 4th, his witness statement.
Thank You, now that's interesting, the investigators were aware of the bathroom habits of the guy the boys from downstairs played basketball with as early as Nov 4th... :clue:
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby pmop57 » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:09 am

Hans wrote:
katy_did wrote:
Hans wrote:But here is this gem from the second part which deals with Rudy Guede:
L'odierno imputato Guede, soprannominato "Il Barone", era già stato, infatti, indicato da Stefano Bonassi nel p. v. di s.i. del 4.11.07 (nel quale aveva, tra l'altro, riferito dell'abitudine di Rudi di non scaricare il water dalle feci) e da Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick il 13.11.07.
Can someone please explain the abbreviations p. v. and s.i. to me?

I think it may be "processo verbale di sommarie informazioni" - in other words the record of Stefano Bonassi's interview on the 4th, his witness statement.
Thank You, now that's interesting, the investigators were aware of the bathroom habits of the guy the boys from downstairs played basketball with as early as Nov 4th... :clue:

Are there other informations leading info a similar direction?
pmop57
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: first trial transcript translations?

Postby KayPea » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:13 am

katy_did wrote:
Hans wrote:But here is this gem from the second part which deals with Rudy Guede:
L'odierno imputato Guede, soprannominato "Il Barone", era già stato, infatti, indicato da Stefano Bonassi nel p. v. di s.i. del 4.11.07 (nel quale aveva, tra l'altro, riferito dell'abitudine di Rudi di non scaricare il water dalle feci) e da Temgoua Ndongmo Louis Patrick il 13.11.07.
Can someone please explain the abbreviations p. v. and s.i. to me?

I think it may be "processo verbale di sommarie informazioni" - in other words the record of Stefano Bonassi's interview on the 4th, his witness statement.


Thanks Katy! :heart:
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”-- Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
KayPea
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:40 pm
Location: Seattle WA

Next

Return to Injustice in Perugia Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests