|
|
Case Parlanti: Katia Anedda answers to the County Attorney and to the lawyer
Milan, Italy - "Being answered after a week and not directly by the attorney who prosecuted Carlo makes me think. The answers were easy and focused on the
result: which evidences? Why the attorney, if he was so sure about the witness and the evidences, offered a deal that after 3 months would set him free?".
This is how Katia Anedda, partner of Parlanti (News ITALIA PRESS N° 244-December 22nd 2006), reacts to the declaration released yesterday to News ITALIA PRESS (News ITALIA PRESS N°26-feb. 7th 2007) by Greg Totten, District Attorney of Ventura County.
About Ron Bamieh, the lawyer who defended Mr Parlanti during the first trial, and who released as well a long interview yesterday evening (News ITALIA PRESS N° 26-7th February 2007), Ms. Anedda says "he's defending his work, I understand, but some of the things he says are untrue ".
District Attorney Totten says that if Rebecca White's statements couldn't be considered reliable, he couldn't start a legal proceeding against Carlo Parlanti.
Of Course. So the DA office affirms is true that Carlo Parlanti drunk 4 litres of wine in 5 hours, reaching a 0.63 bac (blood alcohol concentration), and so all the scientific researches - saying that in a range between 0.35 and 0.45 bac people become comatose and may die- are unreliable. Take a look at intox.com. More tables, explanations etc are available on the website I made to let people know about this nonsense: carloparlanti.it. But, please, disregard what I'm saying and writing, and try to be informed by yourself. Moreover, concerning the declarations you got from them ( instead of answering to an interview), the DA office believed that Carlo Parlanti inserted his hand and forearm inside Mrs White's vagina. Obviously, I'd say, Mrs White lost so many blood to soak a mattress, but she didn't need to visit a doctor, nobody thought about analysing the mattress but, as she said in the police report, she agreed to have 3 other sexual intercourses in the 16 days that followed the crime.
I would suggest the DA to ask his wife about this last topic: would she have sexual intercourses with him, in the days following a rape that caused tremendous blood leaks?
I may presume the DA office believes Rebecca White is Wonder Woman and Carlo Parlanti please remember: lieutenant in Italian Army reserve, a well appreciated IT manager much sought-after by US Companies is a crazy Superman.
The DA talks about moral obligation and legal obligation in persecuting Carlo Parlanti.
The DA has to explain then why in November 2005 a deal has been offered to Carlo, a deal which would have allowed him to return home in 3 months.
Why such a deal, if the DA really thought Carlo Parlanti was dangerous criminal.
If the DA thought Carlo was a rapist of such caliber, the moral obligation I would think would have been to protect future possible victims.
The DA instead offered a deal.
I'm sure to declare (I know the DA cannot contradict me with reasonable common sense and logic) that the DA never believed a word of the presumed victim.
When I refer to the DA I'm referring to Gilbert Romero who has been involved with the case, as the chief DA Totten has not been involved with the case.
Attorney Romero has been contacted by us, but he didn t answer to our request of composite interview about the issue; he said he identifies himself in Totten' s declarations.
In my opinion, this is uncorrect. If the attorney doesn' t have any doubt about the case, why not facing the debate now that the trial is closed?
Attorney Totten considers Mrs White s testimony reliable, while you have always argued the contrary fighting his legal battle, and I don t change my mind
.
Which evidences have been produced by Prosecuting Attorney? Just some pictures of an house in perfet order, without any trace of blood? Why the mattress has not been examinated or the the computers distrained? Mrs White didn t report the crime immediately as Mr. Parlanti, she said, was controlling phones and faxes of the Police: is she reliable? Why nobody investigated on that, maybe throught the FBI? This is a Federal Offence!
Could be realiable that all of us have been made a blunder about the photos? I first! Without knowing it, I would have lived with criminal mind for 3 years before he was going to move to the USA and 2 years after his return.
How can the attorney be sure about the reliability of this woman with previous charges similar to the ones made against Carlo, and with "skeletons in her closet"? Attorney knows what I' m referring to.
Your lawyer Ron Bamieh too, speaks about the photos and confirms that it s quite hard to date them.
Everybody can notice the discrepancies comparing the two photos taken using a disposable self-timer camera with the one taken by the Police the day of the report. Hair, skin, position and place where she affirms the photos have been taken, bruises of such importance that disappeared in 15 days, considering that 8 witnesses declared to have not noted any sign of violence on the alleged victim. Should the attorney have asked for further investigations? Everybody doubts just watching the photos but not the Jury and the attorney! We could leave out that these photos are mysteriously appeared after 3 years from the alleged victim, nobody heard about their existence before , but, only watching them, they should ask for further investigations.
The Proxy said that the physical attitude of the victim during the testimony is one of the factors the jurors use in order to estimate the credibility . Let me specify that this woman "a victim" is paradoxical and disrespectful regarding the misfortunes of the true victims. The Proxy chief Totten has not seen the attitude of White during the testimony, attitude that instead has been considered 'immediatly annoying' by those in courtroom. The Proxy clearly said that no incontestable medical report has been introduced to you?
But it's important to understand that while Ms White testified at the preliminary hearing (with no jury) without any kind of support, she asked for an assistant at the trial (see the opening of the trial in December 8th transcription); and the proxy also knows that while White has been introduced to the trial without using any stick, she entered the courtroom using a stick on the 3rd of march (the sentence day) saying that it was because of the serious phisical damages she suffered from Carlo's assault and that she expected the highest conviction without consideration for the jail already lived by Carlo!?
|
If you'd like to help us raising funds in order to grant Carlo a fair trial, you can donate some money by clicking the button above. Even a little money can make the difference. Thank you!
- 
- 
