Italy will send Marines Back to India for Trial

[Grifo]

.had there been an evidence that the ship is not antony,why is italian govt not siding your view?

are you calling your gov imbeciles??

They are used to it. On italian social networks where we discuss this story say very worse.
But we're not here to talk about politics.

 

[Grifo]

@Grifo says they were not killed by italians and to support his view he is presenting some points.

Tanks.

The autopsy on the two victims was made on February 16 by Prof. Sasikala, director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine of Trivandrum.
An Italian journalist of the Corriere della Sera was able to have her March 4, 2012.
Marò, doppia verità anche dall' autopsia I tempi si allungano

Even the direct reading of autopsy performed on the corpse of Mr. Valentine on February 16 perplexing. The document (accessed through a Indian source) contains two interesting passages, but they seem difficult to reconcile with each other.
First point: it says that the bullets have followed a trajectory from 'top to bottom (and this could be compatible with a shot at a distance from the monumental Lexie toward the fishing boat of nine meters).
Second, the report, signed by K. Sasikala, Professor of Legal Medicine and Surgery in Trivandrum, claims that the "metal-tipped bullet" found in the skull of the fisherman measure "3.1 cm in length", "two centimeters circumference at the tip" and "2.4 above the basis."

I asked for confirmation that the measures were those, and confirms that he had read the original document. About 5 months ago I had one other confirmation by a different person.
These measures are those for which I became interested in the story, because I judged it impossible that a forensic expert describing a bullet in cm, and indicate the circumference instead of the diameter. (plus it is impossible to measure the circumference of a small object: it is obtained by measuring the diameter with a gauge, and then apply the formula of plane geometry to derive the circumference)
Why has not written directly the diameter?

2,4 cm = 24 mm.
Starting from the circumference (24mm) C is easy to calculate the radius R, with the formula R = C/2Ï€, and then the diameter of our bullet will be: 7.64 mm.

In essence autopsy came out a 7.62 caliber of bullet.
And indeed Indian press appeared articles where the police were back on Enrica Lexie to seek the weapon was missing, he pointed the rifle Beretta ARX which can also be built in caliber 7,62 x39, but it did not find any weapon caliber 7.62 ; only 5.56x45 NATO caliber weapons.

Prof. Sasikala never responded to the requests of Italian journalists, and the autopsy was never mentioned. But I think that a copy has arrived in Italy, and is located in a drawer is securely closed.

So already March 4, 2012 I said to myself: but if already on February 16 the autopsy indicated a 7.62 caliber bullet, why were not released immediately from the accusations?

Then, on 14 April 2012, the Italian media showed the ballistics report as evidence of the guilt of the two Marines. Practically a unified networks and the major national newspapers.
But I talk about in the next entry, now we talk about the autopsy and the bullet caliber 7.62;

Do you know this story?

 

[Grifo]

why you guys discussing the distance or location of ship ?

What should be discussed is why unarmed innocent fishermen were killed by Italian marines without any provocation ? and top of that why Italian are acting as if nothing has happen and why they are not cooperating in Investigation and trial ?

May be Indian Court will ask hard way to Italians to cooperate in the matter.

This is your personal opinion.

 

[drkrn]

Tanks.

The autopsy on the two victims was made on February 16 by Prof. Sasikala, director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine of Trivandrum.
An Italian journalist of the Corriere della Sera was able to have her March 4, 2012.
Marò, doppia verità anche dall' autopsia I tempi si allungano

Even the direct reading of autopsy performed on the corpse of Mr. Valentine on February 16 perplexing. The document (accessed through a Indian source) contains two interesting passages, but they seem difficult to reconcile with each other.
First point: it says that the bullets have followed a trajectory from 'top to bottom (and this could be compatible with a shot at a distance from the monumental Lexie toward the fishing boat of nine meters).
Second, the report, signed by K. Sasikala, Professor of Legal Medicine and Surgery in Trivandrum, claims that the "metal-tipped bullet" found in the skull of the fisherman measure "3.1 cm in length", "two centimeters circumference at the tip" and "2.4 above the basis."

I asked for confirmation that the measures were those, and confirms that he had read the original document. About 5 months ago I had one other confirmation by a different person.
These measures are those for which I became interested in the story, because I judged it impossible that a forensic expert describing a bullet in cm, and indicate the circumference instead of the diameter. (plus it is impossible to measure the circumference of a small object: it is obtained by measuring the diameter with a gauge, and then apply the formula of plane geometry to derive the circumference)
Why has not written directly the diameter?

2,4 cm = 24 mm.
Starting from the circumference (24mm) C is easy to calculate the radius R, with the formula R = C/2Ï€, and then the diameter of our bullet will be: 7.64 mm.

In essence autopsy came out a 7.62 caliber of bullet.
And indeed Indian press appeared articles where the police were back on Enrica Lexie to seek the weapon was missing, he pointed the rifle Beretta ARX which can also be built in caliber 7,62 x39, but it did not find any weapon caliber 7.62 ; only 5.56x45 NATO caliber weapons.

Prof. Sasikala never responded to the requests of Italian journalists, and the autopsy was never mentioned. But I think that a copy has arrived in Italy, and is located in a drawer is securely closed.

So already March 4, 2012 I said to myself: but if already on February 16 the autopsy indicated a 7.62 caliber bullet, why were not released immediately from the accusations?

Then, on 14 April 2012, the Italian media showed the ballistics report as evidence of the guilt of the two Marines. Practically a unified networks and the major national newspapers.
But I talk about in the next entry, now we talk about the autopsy and the bullet caliber 7.62;

Do you know this story?

the bullet could have changed its dimensions on impact .obviously it will

spurious observation.

ballistic forensics have confirmed by military persons.autopsy is done by medical person,i myself being a doctor knows what exactly is the procedure of autopsy.i hope i can clarify your doubts

 

[sayareakd]

This is your personal opinion.

this is my professional opinion, i am lawyer by profession.

I dont have time or else i would have told you what is going on in that court it is hardly 2 km from my office, but i dont practice in that court.

 

[sayareakd]

the bullet could have changed its dimensions on impact .obviously it will

spurious observation.

ballistic forensics have confirmed by military persons.autopsy is done by medical person,i myself being a doctor knows what exactly is the procedure of autopsy.i hope i can clarify your doubts

lots of doctors here...............................

 

[Grifo]

the bullet could have changed its dimensions on impact .obviously it will

spurious observation.

ballistic forensics have confirmed by military persons.autopsy is done by medical person,i myself being a doctor knows what exactly is the procedure of autopsy.i hope i can clarify your doubts

My doubts are to terminal ballistics. I am not a specialist in this matter, but I have not superficial knowledge.

It is impossible to find a skull in a bullet 5.56x45 NATO intact, it also fragmented going through the soft tissues. In this case, would have passed through the bone, and then remained inside.
It 'easy to verify, because the bullet 5.56x45 is designed to break at the impact (it has a center of gravity backward, and a steel-core steel)
This is a radiograph of a body hit by a 5.56x45, and you can clearly see the bullet fragments.
http://rapidshare.com/files/2771831114/556a.jpg

In this picture you can see how the bullet is always fragmented 5:56 (except the AP, Armoured Piercing)
http://rapidshare.com/files/4289354763/556b.jpg

So, if I read in the autopsy that was found "a bullet" that you can measure length and girth I think that it is not a 5.56x45 NATO as those supplied with the team embarked on Enrica Lexie.
If these measures (diameter 7.64 mm and length 31 mm) correspond to a different bullet I have confirmation.

We want to argue that the Italian journalist has invented everything? Ok.
We want to argue someone who has spent a false document? Ok.
The fact remains that in the days after the facts Indian police went to look for the ship weapons other than those already seized, and 7.62 caliber weapons were not supplied to our military.

And so I want to see the autopsy, all. Video, x-rays, photographs etc.
I have the right to see it? Yes, well. I do not have the right to see it? evil, in a process technical documents must be verifiable, and must be available to all. I have access to the bullet recovered to analyze it? Yes, well. I am being denied? evil. It is not offensive to India, is the right of defense.
As Court Expert of defense would also have the right to ask for the exhumation of the bodies for further analysis, if I find reason to do so.

 

[Grifo]

this is my professional opinion, i am lawyer by profession.

I dont have time or else i would have told you what is going on in that court it is hardly 2 km from my office, but i dont practice in that court.

Well, then I ask you a consultation.

In your legal system when a citizen may request the tribunal to court records?
I have read that it is not possible during the investigation, but it should be possible at least at the beginning of the trial. Otherwise do not understand how the defense is able to defend the accused, certainly not only contesting the word of witnesses. If he says white, how can I argue that it is black? Thing is, a war just talk?

I am interested by the court to have the technical documents (autopsy, ballistics, reliefs on the vessel etc.).
The Indian lawyer I've heard does not give me the assurance, he is vague, says she's going to ask and then we'll see.
Defence lawyers say they have no documents (except the Supreme Court sentence) and I do not understand how to prepare the defense, if they do not know anything!
The NIA says it will bring 60 witnesses. But how do you verify what the witnesses said if there are technical documents that allow you to do that? The witnesses speak, err, forget, invent, should be monitored. It's not that 60 witnesses say donkey flies, donkey really flies.
In short, if you are lawyer you know how things are.

I give you an example.
In the report of the captain of Enrica Lexie is written that at the time of the fact sent SSAS alert. This means that the MRCC Mumbai has been warned in real time.
But I read that the MRCC says he has no evidence of SSAS alert, and then there are two possibilities: A) have not received B) slept.
So I need to know the geographical location and height above sea level of the antennas of the MRCC, to see if the signal could reach from Enrica Lexie to the antennas. And if it could reach, it arrived. So I need the technical documents, not only witnesses.

Can you tell me when, according to your order, I will have them available?

 

[drkrn]

lots of doctors here...............................

for medico-LEGAL advices

 

[drkrn]

It is impossible to find a skull in a bullet 5.56x45 NATO intact

not a hard and fast rule.

, it also fragmented going through the soft tissues. In this case, would have passed through the bone, and then remained inside.
It 'easy to verify, because the bullet 5.56x45 is designed to break at the impact (it has a center of gravity backward, and a steel-core steel)
This is a radiograph of a body hit by a 5.56x45, and you can clearly see the bullet fragments.
http://rapidshare.com/files/2771831114/556a.jpg

In this picture you can see how the bullet is always fragmented 5:56 (except the AP, Armoured Piercing)
http://rapidshare.com/files/4289354763/556b.jpg

there exist many variants in bullets.not all bullets of military are of single type.the concept of fragmentation is to give multiple injuries on impact.

So, if I read in the autopsy that was found "a bullet" that you can measure length and girth I think that it is not a 5.56x45 NATO as those supplied with the team embarked on Enrica Lexie.
If these measures (diameter 7.64 mm and length 31 mm) correspond to a different bullet I have confirmation.

i cant comment on technical analysis based upon your info,but during autopsy a doctor only will find out entry and exit wounds in which entry wound is present,usually with resemblance to bullet,not necessarily same os of bullet.

where did you get the autopsy report in detail.it is never disclosed to public.its a criminal offence to do so.

We want to argue that the Italian journalist has invented everything? Ok.
We want to argue someone who has spent a false document? Ok.
The fact remains that in the days after the facts Indian police went to look for the ship weapons other than those already seized, and 7.62 caliber weapons were not supplied to our military.

And so I want to see the autopsy, all. Video, x-rays, photographs etc.
I have the right to see it? Yes, well. I do not have the right to see it? evil, in a process technical documents must be verifiable, and must be available to all. I have access to the bullet recovered to analyze it? Yes, well. I am being denied? evil. It is not offensive to India, is the right of defense.
As Court Expert of defense would also have the right to ask for the exhumation of the bodies for further analysis, if I find reason to do so.

sorry you are not authorized to see the evidences as far as my knowledge goes.its only another person with knowledge in the respective matter may be summoned by court or asked to re examine the evidences if the court feels a need of such.

 

[drkrn]

Well, then I ask you a consultation.

In your legal system when a citizen may request the tribunal to court records?
I have read that it is not possible during the investigation, but it should be possible at least at the beginning of the trial. Otherwise do not understand how the defense is able to defend the accused, certainly not only contesting the word of witnesses. If he says white, how can I argue that it is black? Thing is, a war just talk?

I am interested by the court to have the technical documents (autopsy, ballistics, reliefs on the vessel etc.).
The Indian lawyer I've heard does not give me the assurance, he is vague, says she's going to ask and then we'll see.
Defence lawyers say they have no documents (except the Supreme Court sentence) and I do not understand how to prepare the defense, if they do not know anything!
The NIA says it will bring 60 witnesses. But how do you verify what the witnesses said if there are technical documents that allow you to do that? The witnesses speak, err, forget, invent, should be monitored. It's not that 60 witnesses say donkey flies, donkey really flies.
In short, if you are lawyer you know how things are.

I give you an example.
In the report of the captain of Enrica Lexie is written that at the time of the fact sent SSAS alert. This means that the MRCC Mumbai has been warned in real time.
But I read that the MRCC says he has no evidence of SSAS alert, and then there are two possibilities: A) have not received B) slept.
So I need to know the geographical location and height above sea level of the antennas of the MRCC, to see if the signal could reach from Enrica Lexie to the antennas. And if it could reach, it arrived. So I need the technical documents, not only witnesses.

Can you tell me when, according to your order, I will have them available?

in india as far as my knowledge goes a person is not allowed to ask for detailed view of autopsy report.the statements of the doctor/expert are final and can only be re-examined by another expert if such need arises and court feels there is need.thats why probably the lawyer is unable to assure you anything.

2nd there are 4+2(dead) persons on antony,so probably other 54 persons for witness by NIA are from competent authorities etc...

if the italian ship had ever sent ssas alert then they will be on say that record and can be produced in court.they can not hide it,but if they said they haven't received any such means either A) they are lying or B)you are lying..

probably you can not have any document in a case of sub-judice without permission from court

 

[sayareakd]

Well, then I ask you a consultation.

In your legal system when a citizen may request the tribunal to court records?
I have read that it is not possible during the investigation, but it should be possible at least at the beginning of the trial. Otherwise do not understand how the defense is able to defend the accused, certainly not only contesting the word of witnesses. If he says white, how can I argue that it is black? Thing is, a war just talk?

I am interested by the court to have the technical documents (autopsy, ballistics, reliefs on the vessel etc.).
The Indian lawyer I've heard does not give me the assurance, he is vague, says she's going to ask and then we'll see.
Defence lawyers say they have no documents (except the Supreme Court sentence) and I do not understand how to prepare the defense, if they do not know anything!
The NIA says it will bring 60 witnesses. But how do you verify what the witnesses said if there are technical documents that allow you to do that? The witnesses speak, err, forget, invent, should be monitored. It's not that 60 witnesses say donkey flies, donkey really flies.
In short, if you are lawyer you know how things are.

I give you an example.
In the report of the captain of Enrica Lexie is written that at the time of the fact sent SSAS alert. This means that the MRCC Mumbai has been warned in real time.
But I read that the MRCC says he has no evidence of SSAS alert, and then there are two possibilities: A) have not received B) slept.
So I need to know the geographical location and height above sea level of the antennas of the MRCC, to see if the signal could reach from Enrica Lexie to the antennas. And if it could reach, it arrived. So I need the technical documents, not only witnesses.

Can you tell me when, according to your order, I will have them available?

wait for charge sheet to be filed by NIA. Charge sheet will be filed only when investigation is complete, they can also file supplementary charge sheet. Charge sheet will have all the things which the prosecution will rely on to build their case. Copy of chargesheet will be given free to both the accused, it is their right to get free copy of charge sheet. If the Judge after reading the charge sheet find it fit to move forward with trial only then trial will start.

 

[drkrn]

wait for charge sheet to be filed by NIA. Charge sheet will be filed only when investigation is complete, they can also file supplementary charge sheet. Charge sheet will have all the things which the prosecution will rely on to build their case. Copy of chargesheet will be given free to both the accused, it is their right to get free copy of charge sheet. If the Judge after reading the charge sheet find it fit to move forward with trial only then trial will start.

its only the charge sheet that will be provided not the forensic reports,am i right?

 

[sayareakd]

its only the charge sheet that will be provided not the forensic reports,am i right?

everything on which Police want to build their case will be in Charge sheet including forensic reports.

 

[Grifo]

where did you get the autopsy report in detail.it is never disclosed to public.its a criminal offence to do so.

I do not, never been to India. It is released not only one document, let's order.

- The 29/2012, the Court of Kollam rejects the request of defense lawyers to admit the two Italian experts to ballistics
- The Italian press on 10/4/2012 there are news about rumors of Indian police: the results of ballistics indicates that the two Italian marines are guilty of the death of two fishermen.
- The 14/4/2012 on the two major national television channels (public) TG1 (video 13:30, 17:00 and 20:00) and TG2 (video 13:00 and 20:30) are shown pages the ballistics report, presenting them as proof of the guilt of the two defendants. The next day the news was picked up by other television and newspapers: 60 million Italians are informed that the two defendants are guilty, says the Indian ballistics.
It is shown in all 8 pages, that I save by the video carefully to examine them.
http://rapidshare.com/files/2813382103/peri2.jpg

And of course I look at the documents very well!


http://rapidshare.com/files/1463166639/tg1_1404_1.jpg
UP - Item 6 and 7 indicate that the bullets in item 1.4 and 2.3 were fired from the rifles indicated in item 14 and 11, which correspond to the two Beretta rifles S C 70/90 seized from the tanker "Enrica Lexie".
In the description of the content the compiler (who has written using a typewriter and not a computer) has begun a new paragraph at the beginning of each item, indicating the item itself starting from the LEFT margin of the page.
http://rapidshare.com/files/1270443589/tg1_1404_2.jpg

If we compare the reference numbers and the name of the fisherman Mr. Ajeesh Pink, as they appear in item 1.4 and 1.5, it seems to be clear that they have been written with two different typewriters, after having delated the previous text whose traces are still visible on the left side of the page.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3892518217/tg1_1404_3.jpg


The falsification is repeated also in the case of the fisherman Mr. Valentine Jelestine in the item 2.3;

http://rapidshare.com/files/28828231/tg1_1404_4.jpg
http://rapidshare.com/files/3321906151/tg1_1404_5.jpg

The enlargement below highlightes that the two textes have been written with two different typewriters.
http://rapidshare.com/files/566819748/tg1_1404_6.jpg
These enlargements highlight the fact that the two texts have been written with two different typewriters.


Evidences

Of course it would be interesting to answer the question whether the falsification was made after the draft of the document, or before the document left the institute that issued it.

http://rapidshare.com/files/3590365507/tg1_1404_7.jpg
UP - On the title page we can see the stamp by hand, which has the date 4 - 4- 2012 and probably a signature or an acronym.


http://rapidshare.com/files/2610714192/tg1_1404_8.jpg
UP -These pictures where the stamp is highlighted do not allow to verify if the document was stamped before or after the falsification of the passage about Mr. Ajseeh Pink.


http://rapidshare.com/files/3393982855/tg1_1404_9.jpg
UP - These ones, on the other hand, seem to show that the document was stamped after the falsification of the passage about Mr. Valentine Jalestine.


Conclusion

In the document released by TG1 and TG2 and presented as an excerpt from the "Ballistic Expertise" carried out by the Indian authorities some traces of falsification of the results are evident.
Such falsification consists in the modification of the elements indicating the guilt of the Italians charged with the murders.
Evidently such elements were different in the first version. Otherwise, it would not have been necessary to modify them.


Now, how do you rate this thing? With these documents was said to days throughout Italy that the two defendants were guilty, until I screwed it to a newspaper that has made us the scoop, which headlined "The Scam". What then was picked up by other newspapers and on the web.

But, who cheated whom? The news report was made by an Italian journalist from India that showed the pack of the paper saying they were the indian ballistics, and they sent video images with leaves that proved the guilt of the two soldiers.
And at least one case the stamp is imprinted after it has been made counterfeiting.

How do you explain?
I guess by now you understand that my doubts are justified, and because I want to see clearly.

 

[drkrn]

I do not, never been to India. It is released not only one document, let's order.

- The 29/2012, the Court of Kollam rejects the request of defense lawyers to admit the two Italian experts to ballistics
- The Italian press on 10/4/2012 there are news about rumors of Indian police: the results of ballistics indicates that the two Italian marines are guilty of the death of two fishermen.
- The 14/4/2012 on the two major national television channels (public) TG1 (video 13:30, 17:00 and 20:00) and TG2 (video 13:00 and 20:30) are shown pages the ballistics report, presenting them as proof of the guilt of the two defendants. The next day the news was picked up by other television and newspapers: 60 million Italians are informed that the two defendants are guilty, says the Indian ballistics.
It is shown in all 8 pages, that I save by the video carefully to examine them.
http://rapidshare.com/files/2813382103/peri2.jpg

And of course I look at the documents very well!


http://rapidshare.com/files/1463166639/tg1_1404_1.jpg
UP - Item 6 and 7 indicate that the bullets in item 1.4 and 2.3 were fired from the rifles indicated in item 14 and 11, which correspond to the two Beretta rifles S C 70/90 seized from the tanker "Enrica Lexie".
In the description of the content the compiler (who has written using a typewriter and not a computer) has begun a new paragraph at the beginning of each item, indicating the item itself starting from the LEFT margin of the page.
http://rapidshare.com/files/1270443589/tg1_1404_2.jpg

If we compare the reference numbers and the name of the fisherman Mr. Ajeesh Pink, as they appear in item 1.4 and 1.5, it seems to be clear that they have been written with two different typewriters, after having delated the previous text whose traces are still visible on the left side of the page.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3892518217/tg1_1404_3.jpg


The falsification is repeated also in the case of the fisherman Mr. Valentine Jelestine in the item 2.3;

http://rapidshare.com/files/28828231/tg1_1404_4.jpg
http://rapidshare.com/files/3321906151/tg1_1404_5.jpg

The enlargement below highlightes that the two textes have been written with two different typewriters.
http://rapidshare.com/files/566819748/tg1_1404_6.jpg
These enlargements highlight the fact that the two texts have been written with two different typewriters.


Evidences

Of course it would be interesting to answer the question whether the falsification was made after the draft of the document, or before the document left the institute that issued it.

http://rapidshare.com/files/3590365507/tg1_1404_7.jpg
UP - On the title page we can see the stamp by hand, which has the date 4 - 4- 2012 and probably a signature or an acronym.


http://rapidshare.com/files/2610714192/tg1_1404_8.jpg
UP -These pictures where the stamp is highlighted do not allow to verify if the document was stamped before or after the falsification of the passage about Mr. Ajseeh Pink.


http://rapidshare.com/files/3393982855/tg1_1404_9.jpg
UP - These ones, on the other hand, seem to show that the document was stamped after the falsification of the passage about Mr. Valentine Jalestine.


Conclusion

In the document released by TG1 and TG2 and presented as an excerpt from the "Ballistic Expertise" carried out by the Indian authorities some traces of falsification of the results are evident.
Such falsification consists in the modification of the elements indicating the guilt of the Italians charged with the murders.
Evidently such elements were different in the first version. Otherwise, it would not have been necessary to modify them.


Now, how do you rate this thing? With these documents was said to days throughout Italy that the two defendants were guilty, until I screwed it to a newspaper that has made us the scoop, which headlined "The Scam". What then was picked up by other newspapers and on the web.

But, who cheated whom? The news report was made by an Italian journalist from India that showed the pack of the paper saying they were the indian ballistics, and they sent video images with leaves that proved the guilt of the two soldiers.
And at least one case the stamp is imprinted after it has been made counterfeiting.

How do you explain?
I guess by now you understand that my doubts are justified, and because I want to see clearly.

any way thanks to the photos.

had you observed the pictures well there is even no need for a discussion.

the first picture itself is a xerox copy from head of regional forensic science lab to court on a "stamp paper" that the specimens are collected and can be taken into(with report) court's possession with letter of authority.

its not a ballistic report test.

1.4 & 2.3 just shows items collected from respectively..nothing else.
beginning a new paragraph for every individual item is a protocol.

if official they are written only by one person at a time only..even if its by two type writers what does it infer??

[The falsification is repeated also in the case of the fisherman Mr. Valentine Jelestine in the item 2.3]
what falsification are you referring to??

the document which was shown in italian news is not an expert opinion.it will only be seen by the court only.

still an illegal(probably) possession of a professional document without any approval from state could land the ones with this document and persons incharge of the document in trouble.


these documents do not have any say that the marines were killers or even bullets are fired from the guns.its just a list of samples collected..
nothing else.
the same documents what the forensic lab people give to police at the receiving of samples from us during a postmortem and after few weeks they give their opinion..


repeated use of word Falsified" from you without any proper evidence is unacceptable.

those papers certify nothing.more or less useless to defence

 

[Grifo]

repeated use of word Falsified" from you without any proper evidence is unacceptable.

those papers certify nothing.more or less useless to defence

Thank you for explanation.

I have never officially charged the document to be false (in my analysis filed to the Prosecutor in Rome do not speak of this document)

But in Italy no legal document may have corrections, erasures or abrasions, if there is one mistake of writing the whole page to be written again.
Therefore, this document should not be presented to the italian people as ballistic report, let alone as proof of the guilt of the two defendants.

Any Italian lawyer would have said that that was not the ballistic report seeing only the corrections in the text.
Any ballistic Court Expert would have said the same thing, because they lack all the elements of a ballistic report (analysis of microscopic, chemical, photographs etc.).

So presenting this as evidence of guilt on the part of state television, and video services in 5 main newscasts, has become a huge disinformation against the Italian public into believing that the two defendants were guilty (when still the process has not even started!)

Your problems! you will say. Yes, but serious problems.

This document is released in TV on 14/4, the Enrica Lexie is authorized starting from india on 5/5, the report of the Admiral Piroli is 11/5/2012 (is partially made public only on 06/04/2013)
The report of Admiral Piroli speculates that the two defendants have voluntarily aiming shot to the fishingboat and indicates a similarity between the vessel St. Antony and the pictures taken by Enrica Lexie, is referred to this document, touted as ballistic report.

Now, you may think that a reporter has inadvertently confused things (but it is not justifiable, has the duty to verify) you can not think that an official report has been verified that the document was not the ballistic report, and we have mounted above considerations ridiculous "desire to kill" and "similarity of the vessel," considerations that are easy to dismount.

On 18/5/2012 dr. De Mistura (Italian diplomat responsible for the management of each other) to Indian Television declared "the death of two fishermen was a fortuitous accident, a wrongful death. Our two Marò have never wanted that to happen, but unfortunately it has happened. "

And this, (I suppose, but it seems obvious), in relation to the document we're talking about, first presented to the public by the Italian State TV and then confirmed by report Piroli, finally certified to Indian television by our representative diplomat De Mistura.

You rightly confirm for me that this document was not the ballistic report.
So either I live in a country of madmen or between April and May 2012 was implemented, consciously, a massive disinformation campaign to accredit the guilt of the two defendants. On the Italian side.

Obviously, in this there is no accountability of the institutions and the Indian media (who can rightly refer to the statements of our diplomatic representative De Mistura), but you understand how this story has been made complicated and inextricable.

However, after having spoken ill of the Italian authorities have to say that if the Court of Kollam admitted the two defense experts to ballistic analysis this would not have happened. This remains the main point of divergence, and that will be the source of all the controversy.

 

[drkrn]

Thank you for explanation.

I have never officially charged the document to be false (in my analysis filed to the Prosecutor in Rome do not speak of this document)

But in Italy no legal document may have corrections, erasures or abrasions, if there is one mistake of writing the whole page to be written again.
Therefore, this document should not be presented to the italian people as ballistic report, let alone as proof of the guilt of the two defendants.

Any Italian lawyer would have said that that was not the ballistic report seeing only the corrections in the text.
Any ballistic Court Expert would have said the same thing, because they lack all the elements of a ballistic report (analysis of microscopic, chemical, photographs etc.).

So presenting this as evidence of guilt on the part of state television, and video services in 5 main newscasts, has become a huge disinformation against the Italian public into believing that the two defendants were guilty (when still the process has not even started!)

Your problems! you will say. Yes, but serious problems.

This document is released in TV on 14/4, the Enrica Lexie is authorized starting from india on 5/5, the report of the Admiral Piroli is 11/5/2012 (is partially made public only on 06/04/2013)
The report of Admiral Piroli speculates that the two defendants have voluntarily aiming shot to the fishingboat and indicates a similarity between the vessel St. Antony and the pictures taken by Enrica Lexie, is referred to this document, touted as ballistic report.

Now, you may think that a reporter has inadvertently confused things (but it is not justifiable, has the duty to verify) you can not think that an official report has been verified that the document was not the ballistic report, and we have mounted above considerations ridiculous "desire to kill" and "similarity of the vessel," considerations that are easy to dismount.

On 18/5/2012 dr. De Mistura (Italian diplomat responsible for the management of each other) to Indian Television declared "the death of two fishermen was a fortuitous accident, a wrongful death. Our two Marò have never wanted that to happen, but unfortunately it has happened. "

And this, (I suppose, but it seems obvious), in relation to the document we're talking about, first presented to the public by the Italian State TV and then confirmed by report Piroli, finally certified to Indian television by our representative diplomat De Mistura.

You rightly confirm for me that this document was not the ballistic report.
So either I live in a country of madmen or between April and May 2012 was implemented, consciously, a massive disinformation campaign to accredit the guilt of the two defendants. On the Italian side.

Obviously, in this there is no accountability of the institutions and the Indian media (who can rightly refer to the statements of our diplomatic representative De Mistura), but you understand how this story has been made complicated and inextricable.

However, after having spoken ill of the Italian authorities have to say that if the Court of Kollam admitted the two defense experts to ballistic analysis this would not have happened. This remains the main point of divergence, and that will be the source of all the controversy.

even in indian courts,erasures and abrasions are unwarranted.

good that you realized them not to be forensic documents.

whatever your naval head says,or your ambassador calling it fortuitous 2 human lives are lost,a nations pride was hurt a government was cheated.

a proper trial will happen

there is a consistent information campaign in your country not for the purpose of saving marines,but for purpose of govt to get re-elected.
thats why even your diplomats/politicians are now actively defending their men in India.

at last it seems you understood the inextricability and complexity of the situation...

courts are Indian and Indian law follows its course.no controversy
we can not make any special reservations to a person who didn't follow the rules ,tried to evade second,denied next,malingered later,lost to keep its sovereign national promise,refused to help the investigation...what else not.

frankly to speak the other mails in your possession might not even be considered in the courts as defense(my opinion)

 

[Nino]

Best regards and thanks for the welcome on this forum

 

[Grifo]

frankly to speak the other mails in your possession might not even be considered in the courts as defense(my opinion)

Your national spirit is admirable, I can understand and appreciate.
But this does not change that in court you have to prove guilt, that you give for granted.
My topics will have to be taken into account, everything will be explained because there are too many points of dispute. This is not only a subject, but a body of evidence that form a credible defensive system, which will go to court dismantled piece by piece if you want to get a sentence without doubt to public opinion.

So far we have briefly examined:
- The investigation. Fishing Boat, Olympic Flair, autopsy
- The witnesses. Fishermen, Coast Guard, the email
- Adm. Piroli report, ballistics

Now we see the trajectories of bullets
According to the reports of italian witnesses the boat was heading starboard side for a collision course. This is the report by the chief of the defense team, one of the two defendants.
http://rapidshare.com/files/1728309818/rapporto_latorre.jpg

In this case the boat always shows the left side, while the shots are on the right side.
http://rapidshare.com/files/1347212845/ang01.JPG
http://rapidshare.com/files/442561811/ang02.JPG
The speech is closed, because you can not find the holes on the opposite side.

Here you can see the shots on the vessel, 3 in all, are on the right side.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3398477644/ang03.JPG
http://rapidshare.com/files/1954220346/ang04.JPG
http://rapidshare.com/files/2529171841/ang05.jpg


But as Mr. Freddy Bosco says 21/3/2012 to Italian journalist Fiamma Tinelli they sailed in the direction parallel and opposite (ie to the South / South-East) have also examined this situation.
(actually in the same interview Mr. Bosco also claims that went to the South, and also that they went to the West. He is just ridiculous)

I reconstructed the scene in 3D so you can easily measure the angles between the wing of plank right of Enrica Lexie
http://rapidshare.com/files/2224510763/ang5a.jpg
and the boat approaching with parallel course and opposite.
Here you can see the scene with the boat at 500mt, 300mt and 100mt.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3532962065/ang06.JPG

And here you can see an enlargement with the position at 300mt and 100mt.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3562137342/ang07.JPG
In this way we can move in the scene and to measure the horizontal and vertical angles of impact at any distance.


Now let's see what can be measured on the St. Antony.
(the whole document is very large and complex, summarize here a few elements)
I'm lucky, because we have a bullet hole passing the right rear of the cabin, taken on two different occasions and certified label stuck to the police. This allows us to measure the angles of impact horizontal (in relation to the center line) and vertical.
http://rapidshare.com/files/2900001899/ang08.JPG
http://rapidshare.com/files/2333709581/ang09.JPG
http://rapidshare.com/files/2382537980/ang10.JPG

These measures of the angles of impact, horizontal and vertical.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3751233938/ang10a.JPG
http://rapidshare.com/files/4088486233/ang10b.JPG

The result is what you see: red trajectory actually measured (both vertical and horizontal), yellow lines that should have been with a shot from Enrica Lexie, respectively 500m, 300m and 100m.
http://rapidshare.com/files/3028994621/ang11.JPG

The presence of a bullet hole on the roof of the cabin allows us to have a feedback on the horizontal plane.
http://rapidshare.com/files/2849167581/ang12.JPG

This impact angle measured horizontal right upper back of the cab: 46,4°
http://rapidshare.com/files/2249073415/ang13.JPG
And this the angle of impact measured horizontally over the roof hole: 44,89° (is centesimal )
http://rapidshare.com/files/2266414462/ang14.JPG

Conclusions

The angles of impact of the bullets detectable on St. Antony are incompatible
- for the route of approach described by italian witnesses.
- for the route of approach described by the indian witness.
The consequence is that the boat approached the Enrica Lexie was not on the vessel St. Antony.

I know from experience that in complex investigations we composing a puzzle. There may be missing tiles, but not may be different tiles. It is not possible to put on.


Now you say that an Indian court will not consider all that so far I have briefly described. Fortunately, it's your opinion because you can not do a trial based on what he says the prosecution. Perhaps you could in remote times, but now they have to find space the arguments of the defense.
It may be that the defense lawyers remain inert and restricted to invoke the mercy of the court (they are paid by us very well!), It may be that the Italian authorities do not allow me to examine radar data and keep them tightly closed in the drawer. Anything can be.
But then public opinion, on the web, what will think?
Here we are showing that on web no one can control the information, and that the civil discussion of different positions is sought by all.