Claudio pratillo hellmann biography sample

Home / Biography Templates & Examples / Claudio pratillo hellmann biography sample

R.L.] at the hearing of10-3-2011

  • FREE
  • PRESENT

    2) Raffaele SOLLECITO, born in Bari 3-26-1984

    • Arrested 11-6-2007
    • Currently detained at the Casa Circondariale of Terni for this cause
    • Released [?] at the hearing of 10-3-2011
    • FREE

    PRESENT

    ACCUSED

    A) (into which Charge C is incorporated [assorbito])

    of the offense under C.P. [Codice Penale, “Penal Code”] Articles 110, 575, 576, first paragraph no.

    The proceedings were marked by witnesses that later recanted their testimony and by court appointed medical consultants (Conti & Vecchiotti) who performed an extra DNA test on the knife. At the time, due to retirements and transfers, the Perugia court district was without additional criminal case judges who could handle the case (and who were not Massei and Cristiani).

    Anna CALISTI, Popular Judge

  • Ms. There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile of the autosomic STRs;

    3. 1-7; translated by komponisto]

    IN THE NAME OF THE ITALIAN PEOPLE

    THE CORTE DI ASSISE DI APPELLO[lit. capoverso]  368 paragraph 2 and 61 no.

    jail] of Perugia for this cause [P.Q.C.]

  • Released [? Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti of the University of Rome — La Sapienza to the Corte di Assise di Appello (Court of Appeals) of Perugia, Italy, regarding DNA evidence in the case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is now complete.

    2, for having, in conspiracy between themselves, simulated an attempted burglary in the bedroom occupied by FILOMENA ROMANELLI in the apartment at Via Della Pergola 7, breaking the glass of the window with a stone taken from the vicinity of the residence, which was left in the room near the window, all in order to secure themselves impunity from the offenses of homicide and sexual violence, by attempting to attribute the responsibility therefor to unknown persons [who would have] penetrated the apartment to this end.

    [these] events having all taken place in Perugia during the night between November 1 and 2, 2007.

    AMANDA MARIE KNOX furthermore [is accused]:

    F)

    of the offense under C.P.

     Articles 81 second paragraph [cpv., i.e. 2, for having, with several actions [all] executing a single criminal plan [disegno], via an accusation lodged in the course of statements given to the Mobile Squad at the Questura [police station] of Perugia, on the date of November 6, 2007, falsely accused DIYA LUMUMBA, known as “Patrick”, of the crime of homicide against the young MEREDITH KERCHER, knowing him innocent, all with the aim of obtaining impunity for all [involved] and in particular for RUDY HERMANN GUEDE, himself [a person] of color as LUMUMBA.

    in Perugia, on the night between November 5 and 6, 2007.

    APPELLANTS

    [are] the Public Ministers of the Office of the Prosecutor of the Republic of Perugia and the accused, against the ruling issued on the date of 12-4/5-2009 by the Corte di Assise of Perugia, wherein Amanda Marie KNOX and Raffaele SOLLECITO were declared guilty of the crimes attributed to them sub letter A), into which the offense alleged in letter C) was incorporated, as well as sub letters B), D) limited to the cellular telephones and E), and, with regard to Amanda Marie KNOX, also of the crime attributed to her sub letter F), crimes all bound together by continuation [unificati sotto il vincolo della continuazione], without the aggravating circumstances [le aggravanti] under C.P.

    Articles 577 and 61 no. Simonetta RANIERI, Popular Judge

  • Ms.

    claudio pratillo hellmann biography sample

    In the end, the judges failed to consider all the evidence that judges Massei and Cristiani had considered. Federica MACELLARI, Popular Judge

  • Ms. Vecchiotti and Conti were appointed by the presiding judge in Amanda and Raffaele’s appeal trial, Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, to conduct an independent review of this evidence, which (like most of the evidence in the case) had long been seriously questioned by Amanda and Raffaele’s defense teams and by outside observers.

    The conclusions reached by Conti and Vecchiotti constitute a damning indictment of the investigation conducted by Italy’s Scientific Police, and in particular of the methods employed by the prosecution’s main forensic scientist, Patrizia Stefanoni.

    There does not exist evidence which scientifically confirms the presence of supposed flaking cells on the item;

    2. Paola NATALIZI, Popular Judge

  • Ms. 2, for having, in conspiracy with RUDY HERMANN GUEDE (GUEDE being the  perpetrator [esecutore materiale] in conspiracy with the co-accused), compelled MEREDITH KERCHER to undergo sexual acts, with manual and/or genital penetration, by means of violence and menace taking the form of lesion-producing constriction maneuvers, in particular upon the upper and lower limbs and vulvar area (ecchymotic suffusions [i.e.

    There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile relative to the Y chromosome;

    4. from entering into contracts etc.] for the entire duration of the sentence.

    In addition, Amanda Marie KNOX and Raffaele SOLLECITO were sentenced, jointly, to the reimbursement of damages affecting the civil parties John Leslie Kercher, Arline Carol Lara Kercher, Lyle Kercher, John Ashley Kercher, and Stephanie Arline Lara Kercher, to be paid separately, and an immediately operative interim compensation order [una provvisionale immediatamente esecutiva] was granted in the amount of € 1,000,000.00 to each of John Leslie Kercher and Arline Carol Lara Kercher, and € 800,000.00 to each of Lyle Kercher, John Ashley Kercher, and Stephanie Arline Lara Kercher, in addition to the forfeitary [i.e.

    1,5, for having, in conspiracy [concorso] among themselves and RUDY HERMANN GUEDE, killed MEREDITH KERCHER, by means of strangulation [strozzamento] and consequent rupture of the hyoid bone,  and profound lesion to the left anterolateral region and the right lateral region of the neck, by a sharp weapon of cutting [arma da punta e da taglio]  as under Charge B), and thus metahemorrhagic shock with appreciable asphyctic component secondary to the bleeding (derived from the sharp-object wounds [ferite da punta e da taglio] present in the left anterolateral and right lateral regions of the neck and the concomitant abundant aspiration of hematic material [i.e.

    The court district director therefore wound up assigning the case to these two judges. 

    This appeals trial is notable for its longevity. “Council spokesperson”]

  • Mr.