Can Anyone Get a Fair Trial in Italy?

What the Amanda Knox verdict tells us about the Italian legal system.

BY ANNA MOMIGLIANO | DECEMBER 10, 2009

In November 2007, a British college student named Meredith Kercher was brutally murdered in her rented apartment in Perugia, Italy. Her roommate, a pretty Seattle native, Amanda Knox, admitted under interrogation that she had committed the crime, but later retracted her confession, claiming police abuse. Nevertheless, Knox and her former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were tried and convicted of Kercher's rape and murder last week in an Italian court.

The Knox trial was fraught with controversy, and the media coverage in the Italian and British press was obsessive. Papers painted Knox as an ice queen, a libertine, and a demon. Speculating wildly, prosecutor Giuliano Mignini accused Knox of "harboring hatred against Meredith" until "the time came for taking revenge," and drunkenly attempting to drag Kercher into "heavy sexual games." Moreover, Knox's family argued the DNA test upon which the case rested was compromised. U.S. cable shows declared the verdict a sham, shredding the evidence and the court's conduct. And now, the Knox case is turning into an international trial on the reliability of Italy's justice system.

The truth is, Italians have long since recognized the unreliability and compromised nature of their courts. At the moment, the Italian public's trust in the justice system is at an all-time low. According to a November poll by Euromedia research group, only 16 percent of Italians fully trust it; just two years ago, the figure was 28 percent. And Italian civil rights groups are intense in their criticism of what they view as kangaroo courts.

For one, they say that coerced confessions and the use of dubious forensic evidence, as might have happened in the Knox case, are way too common. "Inquiries are conducted without any reliable methods," says Roberto Malini, president of EveryOne, a nongovernmental organization that defends ethnic minorities in jail. "Tests take place solely in the laboratories of the state police. There's no independent lab, and independent observers do not have access to the police's work."

He also claims that prosecutors routinely present evidence as proof. "Recently we've followed the case of Romulus Mailat, a young man accused of raping and murdering a woman in Rome," Malini says. "The prosecutors [said] the defendant had blood under his fingernails, assuming it was the victim's. Oddly enough, they didn't think of taking a DNA test. The defendant's lawyer had to ask for it. When finally the test was taken, the prosecutors claimed it was unreliable because the blood had been reportedly altered by water, and they refused to show the results." Mailat was convicted.

Legal experts also share concerns about Italy's bar for admissibility. Il Giornale, a conservative newspaper, for instance, recently published an interview with Marco Morin, a Venice-based firearms expert who declared he no longer wanted to work in Italian courts. "In the United States, federal judges must study a 637-page manual in order to be able to evaluate [forensic] evidence," he told the newspaper. "Here, they accept everything without questioning, as long as it comes from the institutional laboratory."

Further, some Italians believe the media is complicit in "creating a general sense of social alarm," says Malini, pressuring authorities to arrest, indict, and sometimes even convict suspects without solid evidence. Newspapers routinely blame blood crimes on suspects belonging to "dangerous minorities" -- that is, immigrants from Romania or Italian Roma -- not just perverting the course of justice, but stoking racism to boot.

"Here in Italy trials take place in TV, rather than in court," Judge Francesco Cananzi, a representative of the national council of magistrates, publicly stated this year. And as the Knox case demonstrated, the court of public opinion is often defamatory. For instance, the Italian press routinely demonizes defendants by revealing embarrassing details about their personal lives, even if unrelated to the trial -- such as the pornography kept on their home computers. Knox's alleged sexual promiscuity, even her preferred underwear, made headlines across the globe.

Oli Scarff/Getty Images

 

Anna Momigliano is a journalist based in Milan.

Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

FP114

3:21 AM ET

December 12, 2009

Can Anyone Get a Fair Trial in Italy?

Nobody knows if Amanda and Raffaele are guilty or innocent. In doubt, a judge should chose acquittal, as it should have been in this case. Therefore, your accusations should have been aimed at the public persecutor and jurors. Not at the entire Italian judicial system, which apparently you are not too familiar with.

This said:

1) Amanda retracted many many days later and you know very well that there were no police abuses. Water boarding methods were not used on her. Just a little slap in the neck, which is common during police interrogations in any countries in the world.

2) media coverage and popular gossips have absolutely no influence on the decision of the jurors. Two judges direct the proceedings, therefore everything not related to the accusations is completely irrelevant to the jurors.

3) motives are not necessary elements for a conviction.

4) it is not true that the "U.S. cable shows declared the verdict a sham, shredding the evidence and the court's conduct." U.S. television programs were fair and balanced on the trial and a small minority of commentators, mainly the most ignorant ones, have questioned the "reliability of Italy's justice system". Their ignorance and lack of knowledge is simply and easily determined by their silly assertions.

5) The Italian justice system is completely pro-defendant. Everyone knows that in Italy you will never end up in jail even if you try really hard. Only murderers and drug dealers are locked up. If you think about committing a crime you should choose Italy, and many foreigners actually do.

6) In your article you say: "The truth is, Italians have long since recognized the unreliability and compromised nature of their courts. At the moment, the Italian public's trust in the justice system is at an all-time low."
Well, the reson is the exact opposite of you are trying to assert. Italians are fed up with seeing criminals, mostly foreign illegal immigrants (Albanians, Romanians, North Africans) coming to Italy and raping women, rob and raid houses, steal and commit other violent crimes and going unpunished because of our excessive pro-defendant judicial system.

7) You write: "Italian civil rights groups are intense in their criticism of what they view as kangaroo courts".
Italian civil right groups denounce the length of trial proceedings and detainment before indictment and sentence, also known as "carcerazione preventiva". "Kangaroo Courts" is an English expression that does not apply at all to the Italian judicial system. It is like saying "banana republic". or similar rethoric phrases.

8) methods of interrogations and the use of circumstantial evidence in guilty verdict is the same all over the world. With only one fifth of those circumstantial evidences, Amanda and Raffaele would have been brought to trial in America and in Brittan, and most likely sentenced to harsher prison term.

9) you have absolutely no idea on how forensic testing proceedings work, nor in Italy nor in America.

10) Romulus Mailat brutally killed an Italian woman in Rome. You should have the decency of not using his name to pursue your frivolous ad meaningless assertions.

11) You write: "... some Italians believe the media is complicit in "creating a general sense of social alarm" ... "pressuring authorities to arrest, indict, and sometimes even convict suspects without solid evidence. Newspapers routinely blame blood crimes on suspects belonging to "dangerous minorities" ... "not just perverting the course of justice, but stoking racism to boot"....
Most Italians, from both left and right, had enought already of illegal immigrants committing crimes in Italy. 65% of the jail population is comprised of foreign nationals. They come to Italy to commit crimes because they know that they can get away easily. This is not racism, but a simple and sad fact (which by the way has nothing to do with the crime of Perugia).

12) Trials take place in courts and not on television. Media covers cases at public's request. That is an issue of free journalism and public demand. It is not a judicial matter. Every media and gossip press all over the world "routinely demonizes defendants by revealing embarrassing details about their personal lives, even if unrelated to the trial". This is not solely the practice of the (So diverse) Italian media.

13) You have written 4 paragraphs, confusingly mixing the law on "processo breve", immunity, Berlusconi's judicial problems and the Knox verdict. It makes no logical sense whatsoever.

14) "The guilty verdict" did NOT "caused an immediate outcry in Europe and abroad". The outcry was made solely by the PR team hired by the Knox family. Clinton and the entire world could care less about the Knox verdict. The trial was fair and the American embassy has already assured the State Department.

15) You write: "Italy has gone on the defensive, with editorials insinuating American chauvinism behind the criticism of the courts, and Berlusconi's government, ironically, defending the courts he so often accuses of activism against him."
The Italian government had nothing to defend.
Except for the Knox PR team, there is no American independent journalist that has "insinuated" anything nor criticized te Italian judicial system. Intelligent and knowledgeable people know exactly what they're talking about.

16) The real problems of the Italian judicial system are others.

Alberto Quartaroli

 

NL01

9:55 PM ET

December 12, 2009

Re: FP114

To Alberto's comments:
1) No water boarding = no police abuse? Your standards are not very high.
2) There's a reason for jury sequestration, which I don't think has happened here.
5) Completely pro-defendant? This particular case does not seem to demonstrate that, given the conviction after the not-so-solid evidence.
6) Yes, the author left out the Albanians as usual suspects!
9) Citation needed. Unless you can show that, for instance, the quote that 'there's no independent lab, and independent observers do not have access to police work' is beside the truth, just leave out this kind of judgment.
10) whether Mailar committed that crime is not the point - in a fair trial, the prosecutor should ask for decent forensic research, and should provide the results even if they do not incriminate the defendant.
11) If the jails contain that many foreigners, they don't seem to get away with their crimes that easily. Maybe the system is mostly pro-defendant for people with the right friends?

 

NOMDPLUME

5:03 PM ET

December 13, 2009

Young American Woman vs. Muslim Pilot

Funny to see this article yet no mention of the Tunisair pilot Shafik Gharby who was convicted in Italy earlier this year after the crash landing of his airplane that had run out of fuel. The verdict was based almost entirely on religious bias and facts where very much misrepresented.
Granted he didn't do as well as Captain Sullenberger, but he was arguably in much more difficult landing and rescue circumstances. Then again I guess he case doesnt deem as much interest as a cute American college girl.

 

F1FAN

10:30 AM ET

December 14, 2009

It Seemed Fair Enough to me

Amanda Knox and her Italian beau were convicted on DNA evidence from one of the murder weapons and at the crime scene, at the very least they were there, or how else would they have left DNA?

As for demonizing defendants in the press, American media and prosecutors are just as guilty of that as anyone in Italy. It's called freedom of the press.

I think the Italian judicial system functions at least as fairly as the US system. Of course we here in America would only ever use small amounts of DNA to convict inner city black men, not attractive, white college girls.

 

F1FAN

10:37 AM ET

December 14, 2009

A thoughtful ink on the sunject I just brought up

http://jagassery.com/blog/blog1.php/2009/12/08/dna-evidence-is-the-best-proof-or-is-it

 

QUESTOR

4:48 PM ET

December 18, 2009

They used an experimental version of DNA testing for just 2 item

And standard ones for all the rest. The lab was not equipped or certified for the experimental LCN, Low copy number type of test. Nor were the DNA technicians trained for it. they could not find ANY DNA evidence attributable to Amanda or Raffaele in Meredith's room. NONE. So the DNA "expert" finally broke the seals on the equipment and pushed test and pushed the test till there was some sort of result that she could use her "expertise" to interpret. Only it was the first time she'd tried this type of extreme test. And without extreme precautions ANY kind of contamination will end up in the results making them useless.

No DNA found using standard accpeted tests. The ended up with a knife picked up at random from Raffaele's kitchen Tested it normally and found Amanda's DNA on the handle. Just like they would find your DNA on anything that you used. The used the standard test and found no DNA on the blade.
They tested the whole knife for blood. No blood detected. And please note that even if a knife is bleached Blood traces will still be found There was no blood found. I was only the nonstandard LCN test that allegedly found Meredith's DNA on the blade. Again from such a small alleged sample that there is no way to believe the result. Instead of billionths of a gram it was in the trillionths if it was even there at all just one spot.

And the knife did not match the imprint on the sheet and did not match the wounds in at least 2 of the wounds on Meredith's neck. just imagine stabbing a neck 3 times and ending up with exactly the same depth... easy if that's the length of the blade. The knife the police picked out by "instinct" in Raffaele's house was too long...

Your comment above mentioned "Murder Weapons" in the plural. I should mention that they only ever brought forward the one knife, not found at the scene, and finally admitted that they thought it only "could be" the murder weapon after the imprint and wound details were brought up.

Did you know that the pretrial evidence was sealed by a judge and yet the prosecutor or other under him leaked a constant stream of so-called evidence and half truths many of which they did not bring up in the trial. This is not free press, this is the prosecution rigging the game with prejudicial pre-trial publicity. And it worked very well Any trial where a juror says the defendant is guilty BEFORE the trial starts... raises serious doubts about the result. Don't forget... there are six "lay judge" jurors and 2 actual judges sitting in the jury box AND int he deliberations after. The two judges can only vote guilty by law and their job is pretty much to convince the other jurors to vote guilty as well. That is pretty much a description of a kangaroo court. Sorry. They don't even have a change of venue to get away from a biased jury pool.

Sorry the LCN test is not accepted in the USA. this "evidence would not even make it to court. No independent testing allowed in Italy. They give you just the parts of the results that they want and no more. And regular DNA testing is freeing Inner city black men these days.... see the innocence project.
As for the DNA tests in this case you can check these links

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18215-knox-murder-trial-evidence-flawed-say-dna-experts.html
http://www.sciencespheres.com/
http://freeaman.001webs.com/pdfs/LCN_DNA_I.pdf
http://freeaman.001webs.com/pdfs/LCN_DNA_II.pdf
http://freeaman.001webs.com/pdfs/Methods_of_the_Polizia_PseudoScientifica.pdf