Continuation Part Eight: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Grinder]

.
I know what I wrote, and I know what I meant, neither of which were what you indicated I wrote or implied I meant.

If you want to make a theoretical argument that motive should not be considered important by judges, juries, and lay people, then fine. But to say it is not important to those same people, is denying reality, IMO.

Cody
.

Well we don't know how important it is to those unnamed judges, juries and lay people. Massei according to Bill and his report (not Bill's) said they chose evil, guess he didn't care.

I've given examples of cases where there was no motive or as Anglo would pointy out no motive discernible.

By the way I never said motive isn't of value when an obvious one exists and is coupled with evidence. I think the term I used was add on. My main point has been that the fact that no obvious motive for Amanda and Raf isn't a stand alone defense. Since there is little to no credible evidence against them they are not guilty and I would find them that way even if the girls hated each other, wouldn't you.

It would be hard for me to convict them even if Amanda had threaten to do so or if she had been broke.

The fact that something seems important to a large number of people doesn't mean it is important which is the discussion. Heck in reality it may not be important to them in a real sense, like the earth being the center of the universe. Or that there is a god and an afterlife.

A solid motive is a big help in finding the perpetrator and getting a conviction. Lack of motive only has no impact on a verdict if the evidence is solid against.

 

[Grinder]

I have another favourite. Ad hominem. You're all over the map now claiming I've said stuff I haven't. Please provide in situ cites.

Nencini begins his 300+ pages basically saying that multiple attackers is a procedural fact. As for motive, he could have claimed sex-game gone wrong but did not. The man even cherry picks his procedural facts.

This is the very problem of trying to pin the scene in Filomena's room on someone as a crime to be prosecuted.

For one thing, where is the set of forensics? The sum total of the forensic's is Battistelli's and Romanelli's observation that whatever the scene in Romanelli's room meant, they both observed, "this is no burglary."

Which is true. The burglary had not taken place in that room. Add this to the fact (yes, yes, yes, I know I'm quoting Follain here, and I completely disagree with a lot of other things Follian claims, as well as the overall arch of his book - which makes it all the more remarkable that he includes this as a reason NOT to regard the mess in Filomena's room as "staged).....

....... the fact that both Filomena and Knox were alllowed to (acc. to Follain) rummage around in their rooms, disturb things, making any future forensic investigation pointless.... the further investigation would not be of a room in situ; therefore it's evidentiary meaning would be useless.

Yet - this was pinned on Knox and Sollecito as if a crime to be prosecuted; and the amazing thing, the real jaw dropper is that the Massei court fell for it. Knox and Sollecito were convicted on this charge!

With no, repeat none, forensic evidence at all to suggest that Filomena's room had been staged to look like a break-in.

And that's before considering the other possibility, which I regard as completely improbably, but at least will consider it. Ie. that someone else staged it. But there really is no reason at all to believe that anyone else did any staging.

Of all the bizarre claims in this.... the prosecution of the two kids for staging a crime scene is about par for the course. It was silliness.

One of many times Bill.

 

[acbytesla]

Nencini is more of a loose cannon than anything else. He declares multiple attackers outside of his courts' purview because (essentially) of the Borsini decision, but then Fisher is absolutely correct. The ISC has signed off on there being now no criminal responsibility assigned to *anyone*, really.

Yet the "motive" Nencini applies is the argument over rent money, and Nencini cherry picks one and only one element out of Rudy's account - that Meredith was talking about missing rent money, and went into Amanda's room looking for it.

............. the story is that Meredith had let Rudy in, that Meredith was sharing with Rudy "sensitive" household issues about Amanda.... to a guy who is a known liar, because Rudy also said in that very same story that Meredith had let him in.

Cassazione is in a tight spot, in my view, although I am sure they could not care less about what a random poster in a random thread thinks.

Of course they are.... if logic was important to them. I'm not really convinced it is. Throwing out Hellmann's verdict didn't really make sense. So does this ruling have to make sense?

 

[Bill Williams]

One of many times Bill.

LOL!!! Is THIS what is bugging you? Wow!

You said, "I don't see where their motives are "procedural facts" but I'm sure you'll let me know."

I'd never said that their motives were procedural facts. I'd asked you to provide an in situ cite saying I had.....

....... and you're bugged by the use of the term, "in situ"? LOL!!!

Moderators.... can you please get us back on track!

 

[Bill Williams]

I am dreadfully sorry that the point of this post got lost because of Latinaphobia.....

....... the fact that both Filomena and Knox were alllowed to (acc. to Follain) rummage around in their rooms, disturb things, making any future forensic investigation pointless.... the further investigation would not be of a room in situ; therefore it's evidentiary meaning would be useless.

Yet - this was pinned on Knox and Sollecito as if a crime to be prosecuted; and the amazing thing, the real jaw dropper is that the Massei court fell for it. Knox and Sollecito were convicted on this charge!

With no, repeat none, forensic evidence at all to suggest that Filomena's room had been staged to look like a break-in.

And that's before considering the other possibility, which I regard as completely improbably, but at least will consider it. Ie. that someone else staged it. But there really is no reason at all to believe that anyone else did any staging.

Of all the bizarre claims in this.... the prosecution of the two kids for staging a crime scene is about par for the course. It was silliness.​

 

[acbytesla]

Nencini is more of a loose cannon than anything else. He declares multiple attackers outside of his courts' purview because (essentially) of the Borsini decision, but then Fisher is absolutely correct. The ISC has signed off on there being now no criminal responsibility assigned to *anyone*, really.

Yet the "motive" Nencini applies is the argument over rent money, and Nencini cherry picks one and only one element out of Rudy's account - that Meredith was talking about missing rent money, and went into Amanda's room looking for it.

............. the story is that Meredith had let Rudy in, that Meredith was sharing with Rudy "sensitive" household issues about Amanda.... to a guy who is a known liar, because Rudy also said in that very same story that Meredith had let him in.

Cassazione is in a tight spot, in my view, although I am sure they could not care less about what a random poster in a random thread thinks.

You really have to wonder about Nencini and this crazy decision. When the only motive he can think of is the one pulled out of Rudy's back side. One that totally contradicts Rudy's other statements and has no confirmation from anywhere else and is confirming a theft that the previous judge who convicted Amanda and Raffaele said didn't happen. Nencini seems as if he is trying to please everyone with his motivation. The Kerchers by saying that it wasn't the sex orgy theme and the ISC finding them guilty. But it is beyond nonsensical.

 

[RandyN]

Originally Posted by Grinder View Post
It is absolutely not the case that a motive must be known to solve a case even this one. The fact that one judge says he think s this is a motive and another says that and yet another says there was no motive proves nothing.


Ahhhh ya....NO!

First...three alleged co-conspirators to a murder is somewhat unusual. And the more unusual the allegations then the more important the motive becomes. In fact in this case I think it is a critical part of the prosecutions duty to provide a motive. ONE motive that fits facts and is somewhat logical to those facts.

As a reminder the opposite of that happened in this case. In fact several different motives have been offered up...one crazier than the next and in the end they went with adding more jail time because of the motive of NOTHING! They killed for no reason and so Mignini asked for more jail time because of this.

Now one might argue that this is a "no motive" motive, but that is just silly. 3 people coming together to kill a fourth and to rape and steal from her requires a motive IMHO.

OTOH...one lone crazy killer who kills and rapes and steals from a lone girl does not require much motive to be explained.

Is an ever changing motive or worse no proven motive the same as lack of a motive? Because I think there is a huge difference. Almost without thought I can zero in on who is the likely suspect in this case...and I watch these 48 Hours things and I get those correct almost always...

The wife is dead. Look at the husband or his GF. The husband is dead...look at the wife or her BF. Motive is a starting point. In trial the case should fit the motive or else something is seriously flawed.

In this case all suggested motives against the three and even the no motive idea fits nothing....except for one scenario. Lone wolf black man killer Rudy Guede was interrupted during a routine burglary and he decided that killing MK was his only option for some reason....the motive of which for that detail is unnecessary to convict.

But to make a case against a 3 some killing machine...I need to see some smoke...a reason, a motive. Its is essential. And it is a crazy missing or mixed up mess in this case due to the wild imaginings of a crazy prosecutor G Mignini who has a well documented record of making mountains out of less than a mole hill...double body swap, pants too small, lets wire tap everyone on my enemy list Mignini. The Narducci family could testify to that except that I bet they are afraid to speak for fear of landing back in the dock.

Look how they silenced Frank. Forget his house-guest manners...how do they muzzle a blogger? Someone who spent most if not every single day inside the courtroom. How is that possible?

 

[PhantomWolf]

In no case, according to Hobbes, do we act out of genuine concern for the welfare of others.
​

That's what happens when you are born 400 years before hand grenades became popular.

 

[Bill Williams]

Look how they silenced Frank. Forget his house-guest manners...how do they muzzle a blogger? Someone who spent most if not every single day inside the courtroom. How is that possible?

They muzzled Frank? Frank Sfarzo? Are you delirious?

I'm not saying that they didn't gave it the old college try........

 

[Desert Fox]

Now one might argue that this is a "no motive" motive, but that is just silly. 3 people coming together to kill a fourth and to rape and steal from her requires a motive IMHO.

OTOH...one lone crazy killer who kills and rapes and steals from a lone girl does not require much motive to be explained.

There is a military term called
Kiss = Keep It Simple Stupid.
In this case with human interactions, it is best to look for simple solutions first before going to the complex and bizarre.
One person doing similar crimes alone is pretty common even if we do not like that it is the case.

 

[Planigale]

Looking at other sites to is interesting how certain memes recur such as that Knox has some form of psychiatric disorder, despite the fact that unlike internet observers a professional assessment was done when she was in prison that identified no such thing. The other recurrent claim is that she was some form of heavy drug user, again despite the fact that assessment for drug use was done when she was arrested and hair analysis and medical assessment were negative and she clearly had no withdrawal issues.

Thank goodness we have Grinder who would not allow any of us to get away with a non factual statement. (I suspect I will now be challenged to reference the out come of the drug analyses and psychological assessment).

 

[Desert Fox]

Looking at other sites to is interesting how certain memes recur such as that Knox has some form of psychiatric disorder, despite the fact that unlike internet observers a professional assessment was done when she was in prison that identified no such thing. The other recurrent claim is that she was some form of heavy drug user, again despite the fact that assessment for drug use was done when she was arrested and hair analysis and medical assessment were negative and she clearly had no withdrawal issues.

As I wrote previously, I had been watching through the Wicked Attraction series.
In many cases, they call a person a drug user for smoking pot.
My thoughts are "Hold on a second."

This is from somebody who have never smoked a joint, a cigarette, and has not drank any alcohol in five years and has never been drunk. Reason why I stopped drinking period is because one of my medicines can interact with alcohol not because I was worried about alcoholism.

 

[Bill Williams]

Looking at other sites to is interesting how certain memes recur such as that Knox has some form of psychiatric disorder, despite the fact that unlike internet observers a professional assessment was done when she was in prison that identified no such thing. The other recurrent claim is that she was some form of heavy drug user, again despite the fact that assessment for drug use was done when she was arrested and hair analysis and medical assessment were negative and she clearly had no withdrawal issues.

Thank goodness we have Grinder who would not allow any of us to get away with a non factual statement. (I suspect I will now be challenged to reference the out come of the drug analyses and psychological assessment).

Just don't say "psychopathology". I did a few posts ago, but think I got away with it.

 

[Samson]

Just don't say "psychopathology". I did a few posts ago, but think I got away with it.

Bill, I love that, Fawlty Towers, just 12 episodes.

 

[Samson]

Looking at other sites to is interesting how certain memes recur such as that Knox has some form of psychiatric disorder, despite the fact that unlike internet observers a professional assessment was done when she was in prison that identified no such thing. The other recurrent claim is that she was some form of heavy drug user, again despite the fact that assessment for drug use was done when she was arrested and hair analysis and medical assessment were negative and she clearly had no withdrawal issues.

Thank goodness we have Grinder who would not allow any of us to get away with a non factual statement. (I suspect I will now be challenged to reference the out come of the drug analyses and psychological assessment).

From the other sites, here are a couple of quotes
Peter Quennell said this four days ago

Leaving it to the Italians to make Knox as right in the mind as she’ll get really seems best. She could not be among a more caring national group in the world.

Ergon said this nine days ago

Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case.

I read everything because this case is so unusual.

 

[acbytesla]

From the other sites, here are a couple of quotes
Peter Quennell said this four days ago

Leaving it to the Italians to make Knox as right in the mind as she’ll get really seems best. She could not be among a more caring national group in the world.

Ergon said this nine days ago

Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case.

I read everything because this case is so unusual.

These guys really are nuts. Not exactly sure what Peter's quote means....but leave it to Ergon to make a homeless junkie a foundation of his belief.

 

[acbytesla]

There is a military term called
Kiss = Keep It Simple Stupid.
In this case with human interactions, it is best to look for simple solutions first before going to the complex and bizarre.
One person doing similar crimes alone is pretty common even if we do not like that it is the case.

This is the reason I get so frustrated with Grinder. I really have no problem with his forcing us to be accurate. I think that is fine.

The problem I have is that he thinks that Rudy's pattern is meaningless.

 

[Grinder]

Looking at other sites to is interesting how certain memes recur such as that Knox has some form of psychiatric disorder, despite the fact that unlike internet observers a professional assessment was done when she was in prison that identified no such thing. The other recurrent claim is that she was some form of heavy drug user, again despite the fact that assessment for drug use was done when she was arrested and hair analysis and medical assessment were negative and she clearly had no withdrawal issues.

Thank goodness we have Grinder who would not allow any of us to get away with a non factual statement. (I suspect I will now be challenged to reference the out come of the drug analyses and psychological assessment).

Look you little mouse....

There is no credible evidence to convict the kids as presented by the prosecution. I've never seen the drug testing results but at this point I don't trust the ability of the ILE to get anything correct. If they said they had taken PCP I wouldn't believe it. If they said they forgot to do the test or that the dog ate the results, I wouldn't believe them...even if the dog testified.

While the PGP were posting here, after I joined, I would question them and did before at Frank's. I've posted the actual noise ticket language dozens of times and the prank comment on the Slog. I didn't believe the prank at all but it turns out there was a prank but not as JoH described.

As far as motive goes, I just don't believe that it is an area that will significantly help getting the kids out of this mess. I don't like hearing good kids, no motive and railroad job from hell. Not that I don't agree that no solid motive has been put forward nor that no significant behavioral issues have been identified, I just think there are more important and definitive issues to set them free, like the lack of credible evidence.

The PGP sites can't allow a Grinder because people questioning their base beliefs would ruin their fun.

 

[acbytesla]

Look you little mouse....

There is no credible evidence to convict the kids as presented by the prosecution. I've never seen the drug testing results but at this point I don't trust the ability of the ILE to get anything correct. If they said they had taken PCP I wouldn't believe it. If they said they forgot to do the test or that the dog ate the results, I wouldn't believe them...even if the dog testified.

While the PGP were posting here, after I joined, I would question them and did before at Frank's. I've posted the actual noise ticket language dozens of times and the prank comment on the Slog. I didn't believe the prank at all but it turns out there was a prank but not as JoH described.

As far as motive goes, I just don't believe that it is an area that will significantly help getting the kids out of this mess. I don't like hearing good kids, no motive and railroad job from hell. Not that I don't agree that no solid motive has been put forward nor that no significant behavioral issues have been identified, I just think there are more important and definitive issues to set them free, like the lack of credible evidence.
The PGP sites can't allow a Grinder because people questioning their base beliefs would ruin their fun.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. As far as Italy is concerned, I agree. But to a certain degree this is a PR battle now..particularly when it comes to what happens to Amanda. The PGP wants to portray her to be some deranged demonic psycho. Your expression..a "stone cold killer". That way no one will care about her if the Italians ask the US to extradite her.

The flip side of course is that the PIP needs to make sure that everyone knows that Amanda is their little sister or the quirky girl next door. Sweet and kind. Raffaele is Harry Potter, mild mannered, wouldn't hurt a fly. There is NO WAY that they could do this. People can and will relate to this. The same is true about the "railroad job from hell". It is a clear catch phrase that describes what is happening.

This stuff makes a difference with people...does it make a difference with the law per se? Probably not. Does it make a difference. I think so...ABSOLUTELY.

 

[Bill Williams]

From the other sites, here are a couple of quotes
Peter Quennell said this four days ago

Leaving it to the Italians to make Knox as right in the mind as she’ll get really seems best. She could not be among a more caring national group in the world.

Ergon said this nine days ago

Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case.

I read everything because this case is so unusual.

Compare the bonehead comments by Ergon (who doubles as "God" during the day, while being a Knox-hater by night) and Peter Quennell....

.... with this blogger who's just recently happened upon all this....

http://amandaknoxauguriesofinnocence.wordpress.com/​

I'm quite sure now that this blog is known, Lenroot Mays will start getting "hate" email. Edward McCall will defeinitely relapse....

Here's the summary of the injustice in Perugia acc. to Lenroot Mays....

- A bogus indictment, the tapping of telephones, the conversations (often doctored) fed to the press to start a smear campaign, a spectacular arrest, prolonged preventive detention under the worst possible conditions, third-degree interrogations, and finally a trial that lasts many years....

- Trial Length as War of Attrition

- Abuse of Preventive Detention Laws

- You’re My Enemy? Then I will Indict You!

- The case against Amanda Knox has never been a search for the truth. Nowhere is this clearer than in the extraordinary “fluidity” with which prosecutors (and now judges) have changed their theories and facts.

- Far from being scandalized by all this, the judges who have convicted Amanda Knox have accepted it calmly and with the greatest complacency. Facts are not stubborn things in Italian courts; they are infinitely malleable things, changeable at whim. Evidence disappears or is withheld. Theories that are advanced one day, disappear the next. Powerful, fact-driven defense arguments are simply ignored altogether.​

I won't redo the whole thing here.... better that you read it in situ.