Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[acbytesla]

Of course she was.

There's no record anywhere at all that says Amanda had any problem at all with Meredith. She liked her, she thought of her as a friend, she didn't know that Meredith & the English women were talking about her behind her back.

That's what the testimony and the phone texts and the emails home all show. Amanda liked Meredith. She liked her Italian housemates, too. Why does anybody believe Mignini's bizarre fantasy of jealousy and rage? It's incomprehensible.

Whatever the English women said later about how Meredith felt about Amanda or how they felt about Amanda is on them. Amanda herself never said a critical word about Meredith to anybody, or you can be dead sure we'd have heard about it. She thought they were friends, which was just one of the many reasons she had a hard time understanding that she was actually being suspected as the killer.

The texts between each other certainly were friendly.

People talk behind people's back all time. Maybe there were a couple of things that at the moment Meredith said whatever she said that bothered her about Amanda, but I seriously doubt that were any real bad feelings. I bet if there were any it was more about the fact that all of a sudden Amanda was spending all her time at work and Raffaele which probably meant less for Meredith.

 

[Bill Williams]

As far as I know, the only complaints Meredith ever made to anybody were in the form of casual gossip with the English women. Amanda kept a vibrator in their shared bathroom. Amanda didn't know that she was supposed to use a toilet brush to clean up after herself every time she used the bathroom. Amanda played the same guitar chord over and over. Amanda was too loud.

It's all irrelevant, though, because the sniping goes the wrong way. Amanda liked Meredith, never spoke ill of her, and of course did not kill her out of jealousy, rage, pique, or for any other reason.

The real question is how Mignini got from Meredith talking smack about Amanda to Amanda hating her enough to murder her. Crazytown stuff.

You must have a differing definition of "smack". By all appearances Meredith handled this minor irritations appropriately.... I mean, why wouldn't she confide in her friends about Amanda first?

By I get your point. The whole thing Prosecutor Crini alleged at trial (unclean toilet), or what Nencini pulled straight out of the blue (Guede's story about Meredith annoyed about missing rent money) is a reason for Meredith to do something to Amanda, not the other way around - and even those things do not rise to any believable level.

It is hard to fathom that we're talking about theories advanced ina 1st world country's court system! Applying their logic, student dorms at all college campuses would be war zones.

 

[kwill]

You must have a differing definition of "smack". By all appearances Meredith handled this minor irritations appropriately.... I mean, why wouldn't she confide in her about Amanda friends first?

Talking smack to me means that instead of being straightforward with Amanda (Hey, it's grossing me out a little to see that dorky rabbit thing in our bathroom!) Meredith said as much to her English friends, according to them anyway -- but didn't say anything to Amanda herself.

It's ordinary how-to-be-housemates stuff that we all figure out as we go along. Be honest. Take care of your own messes. Let people know if they're doing something that bugs you so it can get resolved.

Irrelevant to the case, unless you're Mignini and able to somehow spin a little immature behavior on Meredith's part into Amanda's towering, murderous rage. He's crazy.

 

[JREF2010]

I do all the time. So does my best friend when he comes home.

thats going way back. the silent phones.

so you have a dad that calls all the time, you are 20 and have a female friend spending the holiday evening in your apartment. Her boss calls and says dont come in to work, and your commitment to help a friend at midnight is cancelled...the evening is free for college fun.

some would

A) understand turning off the phones or silencing them. just as Raffaele and Amanda said. to not be interrupted...

B) be a Guiltard. See through the Migninni glasses, that the silence of the phones was proof of plotting a sex orgy killing, possibly with satanic meaning as its the holiday of death, and probably drugs and drinking included and more satanic sex orgy killing, angry rage sets in a killing and murder is quickly planned.

 

[Planigale]

Since we are quoting parallel cases, the one i like is Nemesis v Athena (ex part Orestes). Nemesis represents vengeance or the vendetta the responsibility of the family of the victim to deliver punishment (here paralleled by the engagement of the Kercher family in the case brought about by the Italian legal system). Assisting Nemesis are the eumenides - the kindly ones - whose job is to harass Orestes, driving him mad, in this case the PGP commentators are playing this role. On the other side is Athena, the goddess of Science, Technology, the Policis. She represents justice and law, the move to the people / state delivering an impartial trial. i have no doubt that Athena is on the side of Knox and Sollecito; she would be appalled by the abuse of science and technology by the Scientific Police.

The sad thing is Aeschylus wrote the play 2,500 years ago to celebrate the move to 'modern' justice. The message is that civilisation is a constant struggle, and Athena clearly has been ignoring Texas.

 

[Desert Fox]

Since we are quoting parallel cases, the one i like is Nemesis v Athena (ex part Orestes). Nemesis represents vengeance or the vendetta the responsibility of the family of the victim to deliver punishment (here paralleled by the engagement of the Kercher family in the case brought about by the Italian legal system). Assisting Nemesis are the eumenides - the kindly ones - whose job is to harass Orestes, driving him mad, in this case the PGP commentators are playing this role. On the other side is Athena, the goddess of Science, Technology, the Policis. She represents justice and law, the move to the people / state delivering an impartial trial. i have no doubt that Athena is on the side of Knox and Sollecito; she would be appalled by the abuse of science and technology by the Scientific Police.

The sad thing is Aeschylus wrote the play 2,500 years ago to celebrate the move to 'modern' justice. The message is that civilisation is a constant struggle, and Athena clearly has been ignoring Texas.

I would be careful as far as modern history
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOQND4fVF_w
The witch hunts after all were a product of the Enlightenment.

That said, I have a feeling you have been reading the skeptical jurist as well?

 

[Samson]

Of course she was.

There's no record anywhere at all that says Amanda had any problem at all with Meredith. She liked her, she thought of her as a friend, she didn't know that Meredith & the English women were talking about her behind her back.

That's what the testimony and the phone texts and the emails home all show. Amanda liked Meredith. She liked her Italian housemates, too. Why does anybody believe Mignini's bizarre fantasy of jealousy and rage? It's incomprehensible.

Whatever the English women said later about how Meredith felt about Amanda or how they felt about Amanda is on them. Amanda herself never said a critical word about Meredith to anybody, or you can be dead sure we'd have heard about it. She thought they were friends, which was just one of the many reasons she had a hard time understanding that she was actually being suspected as the killer.

kwill, there is a proliferation of own goals being scored since these communications are being publicised by the believers in guilt. It is axiomatic that an innocent Amanda will be regular and unexceptional in this important time period. It is really important to make a difference before the next decision. Clearly after is too late to rescue these lives.

 

[Planigale]

I would be careful as far as modern history
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOQND4fVF_w
The witch hunts after all were a product of the Enlightenment.

That said, I have a feeling you have been reading the skeptical jurist as well?

yes

 

[Planigale]

I would be careful as far as modern history
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOQND4fVF_w
The witch hunts after all were a product of the Enlightenment.

That said, I have a feeling you have been reading the skeptical jurist as well?

Relevant to our discussions, the English common law system meant that the vast majority of people accused of witch craft were never punished. Only the civil courts not the church courts could punish, witchcraft for most of English history was not a crime. The crime was e.g. murder, and the method was witchcraft, proving witchcraft as the cause of death was not easy. Finally witches could not be tortured, torture needed a royal warrant, (less than a hundred royal warrants for torture have ever been issued). and confessions were not acceptable evidence in the English common law system, torture was used to obtain evidence against others. the major witch hunts in England happened following the civil war when the central control of courts temporarily failed. Witch hunts were fairly rapidly stopped (they occurred between 1644-7) given the disruption of a civil war.

Is it better to have a legislative system in place? Torture was legal for most of history in England but needed a royal warrant. If the president had needed to sign a warrant for each individual subjected to water boarding would fewer abuses have happened? Torture was used rarely in England not because it was illegal but because it needed to be important if you were going to get the King to sign a warrant and because (certainly reading Elizabethan anti-catholic literature) there was much doubt about its efficacy.

(I accept illegal torture probably happened but did leave the person responsible vulnerable to being accused of crime himself - as did happen for some of the witch hunters in England).

 

[Bill Williams]

Talking smack to me means that instead of being straightforward with Amanda (Hey, it's grossing me out a little to see that dorky rabbit thing in our bathroom!) Meredith said as much to her English friends, according to them anyway -- but didn't say anything to Amanda herself.

It's ordinary how-to-be-housemates stuff that we all figure out as we go along. Be honest. Take care of your own messes. Let people know if they're doing something that bugs you so it can get resolved.

Irrelevant to the case, unless you're Mignini and able to somehow spin a little immature behavior on Meredith's part into Amanda's towering, murderous rage. He's crazy.

Then there is a differing definition of smack. As a Brit, it would be completely normal for Meredith to be guarded about criticisms sent Amanda's way, and it would be completely normal to cautiously air these grievances first with trusted friends. It would have been the same if Meredith had had a grievance against one of her new found all-be-they similarly British friends; confided in Amanda first.... either that or simply not say anything at all.

This is one of those cultural differences between a Brit and a Seattleite. Two great civilizations forever separated by a common language.

ETA - However, most Brits would not divulge personalisms to a brash American; the immediate types like Amanda Knox and Kwill! It is disorienting to most Brits to have these things immediately blurted out.....

 

[carbonjam72]

Then there is a differing definition of smack. As a Brit, it would be completely normal for Meredith to be guarded about criticisms sent Amanda's way, and it would be completely normal to cautiously air these grievances first with trusted friends. It would have been the same if Meredith had had a grievance against one of her new found all-be-they similarly British friends; confided in Amanda first.... either that or simply not say anything at all.

This is one of those cultural differences between a Brit and a Seattleite. Two great civilizations forever separated by a common language.

ETA - However, most Brits would not divulge personalisms to a brash American; the immediate types like Amanda Knox and Kwill! It is disorienting to most Brits to have these things immediately blurted out.....

Originally Posted by acbytesla
I do all the time. So does my best friend when he comes home.
thats going way back. the silent phones.

KWILL: so you have a dad that calls all the time, you are 20 and have a female friend spending the holiday evening in your apartment. Her boss calls and says dont come in to work, and your commitment to help a friend at midnight is cancelled...the evening is free for college fun.
some would

A) understand turning off the phones or silencing them. just as Raffaele and Amanda said. to not be interrupted...

B) be a Guiltard. See through the Migninni glasses, that the silence of the phones was proof of plotting a sex orgy killing, possibly with satanic meaning as its the holiday of death, and probably drugs and drinking included and more satanic sex orgy killing, angry rage sets in a killing and murder is quickly planned.

Adding to Bill's point, Italian culture is also different from Meredith's British, and Amanda laid back Seattle, ethos (ethi? Ethoses?).

 

[carbonjam72]

Since we are quoting parallel cases, the one i like is Nemesis v Athena (ex part Orestes). Nemesis represents vengeance or the vendetta the responsibility of the family of the victim to deliver punishment (here paralleled by the engagement of the Kercher family in the case brought about by the Italian legal system). Assisting Nemesis are the eumenides - the kindly ones - whose job is to harass Orestes, driving him mad, in this case the PGP commentators are playing this role. On the other side is Athena, the goddess of Science, Technology, the Policis. She represents justice and law, the move to the people / state delivering an impartial trial. i have no doubt that Athena is on the side of Knox and Sollecito; she would be appalled by the abuse of science and technology by the Scientific Police.

The sad thing is Aeschylus wrote the play 2,500 years ago to celebrate the move to 'modern' justice. The message is that civilisation is a constant struggle, and Athena clearly has been ignoring Texas.

This is great.

 

[kwill]

Then there is a differing definition of smack. As a Brit, it would be completely normal for Meredith to be guarded about criticisms sent Amanda's way, and it would be completely normal to cautiously air these grievances first with trusted friends. It would have been the same if Meredith had had a grievance against one of her new found all-be-they similarly British friends; confided in Amanda first.... either that or simply not say anything at all.

This is one of those cultural differences between a Brit and a Seattleite. Two great civilizations forever separated by a common language.

ETA - However, most Brits would not divulge personalisms to a brash American; the immediate types like Amanda Knox and Kwill! It is disorienting to most Brits to have these things immediately blurted out.....

I happen to have a couple of daughters (roughly the same age as Amanda) who grew up here in Seattle in similar-but-not-the-same circles. They would both be the first to admit that talking behind peoples' backs of course goes on, but it's also seen as immature and not productive, especially if you're working on having a good co-housing experience. At Jesuit high schools here, I can tell your for certain that there's a very strong emphasis on how (and how not) to be a good friend. Clarity & openness are required, if that's the goal.

We don't see it as immediately blurting things out, you know? It's more like, let's deal with this now so it doesn't become a thing. We would see it as a brave thing to mention something that bothers you, and a chicken-sheet thing to say nothing & then go whispering to others.

From Amanda's perspective, Meredith was just a new friend. The idea that Meredith's criticisms = Amanda's motive for murder is truly bonkers. Truly.

 

[Desert Fox]

Relevant to our discussions, the English common law system meant that the vast majority of people accused of witch craft were never punished. Only the civil courts not the church courts could punish, witchcraft for most of English history was not a crime. The crime was e.g. murder, and the method was witchcraft, proving witchcraft as the cause of death was not easy. Finally witches could not be tortured, torture needed a royal warrant, (less than a hundred royal warrants for torture have ever been issued). and confessions were not acceptable evidence in the English common law system, torture was used to obtain evidence against others. the major witch hunts in England happened following the civil war when the central control of courts temporarily failed. Witch hunts were fairly rapidly stopped (they occurred between 1644-7) given the disruption of a civil war.

Is it better to have a legislative system in place? Torture was legal for most of history in England but needed a royal warrant. If the president had needed to sign a warrant for each individual subjected to water boarding would fewer abuses have happened? Torture was used rarely in England not because it was illegal but because it needed to be important if you were going to get the King to sign a warrant and because (certainly reading Elizabethan anti-catholic literature) there was much doubt about its efficacy.

(I accept illegal torture probably happened but did leave the person responsible vulnerable to being accused of crime himself - as did happen for some of the witch hunters in England).

The numbers do not look wonderful actually - 5000 accusations and 1500 to 2000 executions for at least a 30% execution rate. [Edit: Found another source which argues for only 500]

Spain did the best as far as witch hunts but those were replaced by hunting Conversos.

How little evidence could be used in witch trials even in the UK can be seen in the Pendle witches cases.

 

[Planigale]

The numbers do not look wonderful actually - 5000 accusations and 1500 to 2000 executions for at least a 30% execution rate. [Edit: Found another source which argues for only 500]

Spain did the best as far as witch hunts but those were replaced by hunting Conversos.

How little evidence could be used in witch trials even in the UK can be seen in the Pendle witches cases.

The 1,500 - 2000 may be convictions, even most convicted witches were not executed in England. The Pendle witches is notable because it was one of the few English witch hunts, and still small by most European witch hunt standards. A good comparison is the far higher rate in a then independent Scotland, despite a smaller population. This may have been due to the inquisitorial system in Scotland as opposed to the common law system in England.

 

[Desert Fox]

The 1,500 - 2000 may be convictions, even most convicted witches were not executed in England. The Pendle witches is notable because it was one of the few English witch hunts, and still small by most European witch hunt standards. A good comparison is the far higher rate in a then independent Scotland, despite a smaller population. This may have been due to the inquisitorial system in Scotland as opposed to the common law system in England.

I would argue that the numbers are just different ways of calculating, even in the 20th Century non holocaust deniers give a wide variety of numbers.

 

[lonepinealex]

This case would make an excellent opera. Maybe I will write the libretto.

 

[Planigale]

I would argue that the numbers are just different ways of calculating, even in the 20th Century non holocaust deniers give a wide variety of numbers.

The point I was making was that whilst in continental Europe there were religious courts who could use torture to extract confessions, and confession was important for religious reasons, and could punish people simply for being a witch. In England most of the trials were not for being a witch but for a tort, e.g. killing a cow, putting the cows off their milk, but by witchcraft as opposed to poisoning, even when found guilty the punishment might be a fine. Most people convicted of a crime using witchcraft were not executed.

In comparison 300 people were executed for being protestants during the reign of Mary 1. It was more dangerous to be (the wrong sort of) christian than a witch. Executions for trivial crimes were common. So the numbers have to be taken against the frequency of execution for all offences.

 

[Planigale]

This case would make an excellent opera. Maybe I will write the libretto.

I agree. My only concern is operas have tragic ending; I hope this will be an operetta.

Of course it had a tragic beginning.

 

[lonepinealex]

I agree. My only concern is operas have tragic ending; I hope this will be an operetta.

I honestly don't think I could write any other kind. Mignini could be straight out of a G&S.