Continuation Part 12: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[CoulsdonUK]

Haven't read any more posts from CoulsdonUK since this epic of a few days ago. Where are you CoulsdonUK?

I fail to see anything epic with the comment; it is accurate.
I may not respond immediately, I won’t bore you with the details.

 

[Desert Fox]

As much as I respect cops and the work the do day in and day out, at interrogation they are not your friend. The goal of interrogation is always a confession - a confession around the basic set of facts the cops think they know, prior to the interrogation.

Some courts have ruled it is fair game for cops to lie to get an interrogation. In Canada, the Supreme Court has just in 2014 put severe limits on the "Mr. Big" sting that cops use to incriminate a suspect. It's the Wold West out there when it comes to interrogations.

The old good cop/bad cop routine is to get a suspect talking..... the one thing they DOn'T want at interrogation is for a suspect to remain silent. There are 100s of tricks to get someone to loosen their lips.

They will claim to want to help you but they never do and their most feared words are "I would like to speak to a lawyer."

 

[sept79]

I fail to see anything epic with the comment; it is accurate.
I may not respond immediately, I won’t bore you with the details.

So the loss of freedom (i.e., being incarcerated) is just a 'walk in the park'? Hmmmm . . .

 

[CoulsdonUK]

So the loss of freedom (i.e., being incarcerated) is just a 'walk in the park'? Hmmmm . . .

This is all rather moot and pointless in my opinion.

The sequence of court related events are that Raffaele has a case against him this month (something to do with Raffale's book).

Then of course we have the other case involving Raffaele and Amanda, March 2015, which of course is the main focus here. Strike that! The main focus here is the ECHR application which probably won't surface until 2016\2017, some might find that farcical.

Anyway, back to you indignation.

 

[Numbers]

Many foci

This is all rather moot and pointless in my opinion.

The sequence of court related events are that Raffaele has a case against him this month (something to do with Raffale's book).

Then of course we have the other case involving Raffaele and Amanda, March 2015, which of course is the main focus here. Strike that! The main focus here is the ECHR application which probably won't surface until 2016\2017, some might find that farcical.

Anyway, back to you indignation.

I would suggest that there are many foci to the discussions on this thread.

Another topic is the murder/rape case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. Here is a copy of my recent post from IAF about that case and the ECHR case-law:

One irony of the irrational and despotic Italian judiciary in the Amanda Knox - Raffaele Sollecito case is the failure of the Italian courts, and particularly the highest appeal court, the CSC, to follow provisions of ECHR case-law specifically against the practice of using the pre-trial statement or testimony in a separate trial of a co-defendant or other person not available for cross-examination in another person's trial. This practice is a violation of the Convention rights to a fair trial and to confront and cross-examine witnesses, Convention Article 6.1 and 6.3d, respectively. And the case-law specifically addressing this issue is Luca v Italy, 33354/96, 25 May 2001. The Italian Constitution, Article 111, was modified specifically to make the Luca v Italy case-law integral to Italian law. And these provisions of the Convention case-law and the Italian Constitution were violated in the trial of Amanda and Raffaele with the use of the "judicial facts" from Guede's fast track trial, in the provisional verdict of guilt from the Nencini court and in the directions from the CSC in Chieffi's motivation report.

Because of the Luca v Italy case-law, the ECHR will find that Italy has once more violated the Convention, Articles 6.1 and 6.3c, if a guilty verdict against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher is finalized by the CSC, when the case comes before the ECHR.
______

I will further suggest that the farcical elements in this sad and troubling case are all the contributions of the Italian police, prosecutors, and judiciary.

ETA: Some may point out that the people exploiting this case to express their cynicism, authoritarianism, or pure sadistic hatred constitute another element, perhaps of farce.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I would suggest that there are many foci to the discussions on this thread.

Another topic is the murder/rape case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. Here is a copy of my recent post from IAF about that case and the ECHR case-law:

One irony of the irrational and despotic Italian judiciary in the Amanda Knox - Raffaele Sollecito case is the failure of the Italian courts, and particularly the highest appeal court, the CSC, to follow provisions of ECHR case-law specifically against the practice of using the pre-trial statement or testimony in a separate trial of a co-defendant or other person not available for cross-examination in another person's trial. This practice is a violation of the Convention rights to a fair trial and to confront and cross-examine witnesses, Convention Article 6.1 and 6.3d, respectively. And the case-law specifically addressing this issue is Luca v Italy, 33354/96, 25 May 2001. The Italian Constitution, Article 111, was modified specifically to make the Luca v Italy case-law integral to Italian law. And these provisions of the Convention case-law and the Italian Constitution were violated in the trial of Amanda and Raffaele with the use of the "judicial facts" from Guede's fast track trial, in the provisional verdict of guilt from the Nencini court and in the directions from the CSC in Chieffi's motivation report.

Because of the Luca v Italy case-law, the ECHR will find that Italy has once more violated the Convention, Articles 6.1 and 6.3c, if a guilty verdict against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher is finalized by the CSC, when the case comes before the ECHR.
______

I will further suggest that the farcical elements in this sad and troubling case are all the contributions of the Italian police, prosecutors, and judiciary.

ETA: Some may point out that the people exploiting this case to express their cynicism, authoritarianism, or pure sadistic hatred constitute another element, perhaps of farce.

Fascinating post and observations must admit I look forward to the outcome! We have Raffaele’s case this month (whatever that is about, right?), then the caluunia application (slam-dunk, right?) and or depending on one’s opinion as to which comes first, caluunia case or Italian Court of Cassations third level trial March 2015. I find myself missing the ludicrous scripts from TV soaps like “Rich Man, Poor Man”, “Soap” or good ol “Dallas”, until the next twist.

 

[Numbers]

Copy (partial) of information I posted on IAF/IIPF some months ago, about the role of sleep deprivation in suggested false memories.

The abstract for the research article in the journal Psychological Science is at this site:

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/07/15/0956797614534694.abstract*

Sleep Deprivation and False Memories
Steven J. Frenda1
Lawrence Patihis1
Elizabeth F. Loftus1
Holly C. Lewis2
Kimberly M. Fenn2
1Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine
2Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
Steven J. Frenda, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, School of Social Ecology, 4201 Social & Behavioral Sciences Gateway, Irvine, CA 92697-7085 E-mail:*sfrenda@uci.edu


Abstract

Many studies have investigated factors that affect susceptibility to false memories. However, few have investigated the role of sleep deprivation in the formation of false memories, despite overwhelming evidence that sleep deprivation impairs cognitive function. We examined the relationship between self-reported sleep duration and false memories and the effect of 24 hr of total sleep deprivation on susceptibility to false memories. We found that under certain conditions, sleep deprivation can increase the risk of developing false memories. Specifically, sleep deprivation increased false memories in a misinformation task when participants were sleep deprived during event encoding, but did not have a significant effect when the deprivation occurred after event encoding. These experiments are the first to investigate the effect of sleep deprivation on susceptibility to false memories, which can have dire consequences.

Original news article at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/sleep-deprivation-false-memories_n_5624176.html

A novel study out of University of California, Irvine suggests that sleep deprivation could partly be to blame for false memories -- a phenomenon in which people absorb incorrect information after an event and end up misremembering the incident.

"We already know that sleep deprivation wreaks havoc on your health and cognitive functioning," said lead researcher Steven Frenda, who specializes in human memory at the department of Psychology and Social Behavior at UC Irvine. "It seems another consequence may be that it makes our memories more easily manipulated and more pliable."

"Sometimes memory distortions are trivial and don't matter, but there are contexts (e.g., eyewitnesses in court, clinicians making medical decisions) where errors have serious consequences, so we need to be concerned about factors that make memory less reliable, and more vulnerable to distortion," Frenda continued in an email to The Huffington Post.

Frenda's study, published recently in the journal Psychological Science, is made up of several experiments designed to test participants on their susceptibility to false memories, and compare their results according to how much sleep they had gotten the night before.

In one experiment, researchers asked 193 participants if they had seen video footage of Flight 93 crashing in Pennsylvania on 9/11 -- footage that researchers claimed had been circulated widely, even though no such footage actually exists.

Participants who had gotten five hours or less of sleep the night before ("restricted" sleepers) were more likely than the normal sleepers to claim that they had seen the footage. Fifty-four percent of those with restricted sleep claimed to have seen it, whereas only 33 percent of normal sleepers claimed to remember the non-existent footage.

"One parallel [to this experiment] might be witnesses who are present at the scene of a crime but don't actually see everything," explained Frenda. "They might hear other witnesses talking, or learn more about the event in the aftermath. After learning about things they didn't actually see, they might come to believe they have a more complete memory than they really do."

In another experiment, the same participants were told to keep a sleep diary for a week, reporting on things like length of sleep or the number of times they woke up during the night. After a week was up, the participants reported to the lab, where researchers showed them two sets of photographs depicting a crime in action: one of a man breaking into a parked car and another of a thief stealing a woman's wallet.

After viewing the photographs, participants read narratives that recounted the photo slideshow with several misleading details. Researchers then tested participants to see how many false details from the written narrative they had incorporated into their memory of the photos.

Those who reported sleeping an average of five hours or less every night that week were more likely to incorporate the misinformation into their re-telling of the photo slideshow. The sleep-deprived group did so about 18 percent of the time, while the rested group relayed misinformation 13 percent of the time.

"The misinformation task is meant to parallel a very common situation in the real world: We see an event, later we may encounter suggestive or misleading information, and finally, we are asked to recount the memory," Frenda explained. "The three stages of the misinformation procedure (encoding, misinformation, test) were designed to model this real-world process."

In the last and most compelling experiment, researchers performed the misinformation task on a new group of 104 participants. Participants reported to the sleep lab and were randomly divided two ways: They would either have a full night's rest or stay awake all night. But researchers also randomly split the participants again between those who saw the crime photo slideshow the night they reported to the lab, when they were completely rested, and those who saw the photos the next day, after they either had a full night's sleep or were completely sleep-deprived.

After feeding everyone breakfast the next morning, researchers conducted the misinformation procedure on all the participants. For those who had already seen the photos when they were well-rested, they read the misleading written narrative and then retold the photo stories to researchers. For those who hadn't done any of the procedure, they completed all three parts.

Which group had the highest false memory rate? Those who had stayed awake all night and did all three parts of the photo experiment in the morning. Interestingly, those participants who had "encoded" the slideshow while they were rested had comparable false memory rates, whether or not they eventually went on to sleep or stay awake all night.

"In other words, sleep deprivation seemed most harmful when it was present during all of the processing related to memory -- the 'encoding' of the initial experience, the processing of post-event information, and the recollection of the memory," explained Frenda.

Assistant professor Henry Otgaar, an eyewitness and false memory expert at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, praised Frenda's study for how its experiments approximated real-world situations.

"This study shows that another risk factor for false memory formation is sleep deprivation," wrote Otgaar in an email to HuffPost. "Although this was an expected result, it is troubling -- not only for witnesses, but also for suspects."

Based on research like Frenda's, Otgaar thinks that the legal system should be very interested in how many times suspects or witnesses were interrogated, as well as how much sleep they had gotten before and after the incident.*Simple exhaustion, not criminal culpability, could be to blame for someone cracking under the pressure of an intense interrogation, explained Otgaar.

 

[Numbers]

More on False Confessions - False Statements

This post summarizes the empirical evidence that false confessions or statements can result from factors that Amanda Knox was subjected to during the Nov. 5/6 interrogation.

Since the "calunnia" statement was the product of external pressure from the police in the course of an interrogation conducted without the counsel of a lawyer for Ms. Knox, contrary to Salduz v Turkey, which ECHR judgment Italy was obliged to obey during the Hellmann court trial and subsequent CSC finalization, there is no doubt that the ECHR will judge that Italy violated Ms. Knox's rights under the Convention.

The only matter for speculation is the date that the ECHR will issue its judgment in her case.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php

False Confessions
In about 30% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty.

These cases show that confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external influences.

Why do innocent people confess?
A variety of factors can contribute to a false confession during a police interrogation. Many cases have included a combination of several of these causes. They include:

•duress
•coercion
•intoxication
•diminished capacity
•mental impairment
•ignorance of the law
•fear of violence
•the actual infliction of harm
•the threat of a harsh sentence
•Misunderstanding the situation
....
•Mentally capable adults also give false confessions due to a variety of factors like the length of interrogation, exhaustion or a belief that they can be released after confessing and prove their innocence later.

From threats to torture
Sometimes law enforcement use harsh interrogation tactics with uncooperative suspects. But some police officers, convinced of a suspect’s guilt, occasionally use tactics so persuasive that an innocent person feels compelled to confess. Some suspects have confessed to avoid physical harm or discomfort. Others are told they will be convicted with or without a confession, and that their sentence will be more lenient if they confess. Some are told a confession is the only way to avoid the death penalty.

Recording of interrogations
The Innocence Project has recommended specific changes in the practice of suspect interrogations in the U.S., including the mandatory electronic recording of interrogations, which has been shown to decrease the number of false confessions and increase the reliability of confessions as evidence.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mandatory recordings

Recording of interrogations
The Innocence Project has recommended specific changes in the practice of suspect interrogations in the U.S., including the mandatory electronic recording of interrogations, which has been shown to decrease the number of false confessions and increase the reliability of confessions as evidence.

Numbers,

Thank for this. This recommendation really needs to be stressed. If one listens to the recording of one member of the Central Park Five's statement, it doesn't sound coerced (as I recall), yet I am strongly of the opinion that it was. That's why it is important to know what happened previously.

 

[Numbers]

Numbers,

Thank for this. This recommendation really needs to be stressed. If one listens to the recording of one member of the Central Park Five's statement, it doesn't sound coerced (as I recall), yet I am strongly of the opinion that it was. That's why it is important to know what happened previously.

My recollection of the documentary The Central Park Five (2012), directed by Ken Burns, Sarah Burns, and David McMahon, was that the coercion occurred prior to the videotaping of their confessions. The five had each been convinced that they must say these false statements, in part in order to return to their families, if I recall the documentary correctly.

 

[Numbers]

One or more posters on this site have expressed concern that statements here may be interferences in the sovereignty of States such as Italy.

In accordance with that concern, I hereby make a suggestion for the adoption of a law in each of the Council of Europe States to minimize the caseload burden on the European Court of Human Rights. It particular, adoption by Italy would be beneficial to the Italian people and to the efficient functioning of the ECHR, but there are other States which would likewise find adoption beneficial. (They know who they are.)

The suggestion has two parts:

1. Each and every judge who signs or endorses a verdict (whether final or provisional) that later results in a finding or judgment by the ECHR of a violation by [NAME of STATE] of the Convention shall have his or her salary or other compensation permanently reduced in the year following the ECHR finding of violation by no less than 5% nor more than 10% of the total it would otherwise be for the year, and shall receive no increase in salary or compensation for not more than 3 nor less than 5 years after the ECHR finding or judgment of violation.

2. Each and every judge of [NAME of STATE] who signs or endorses a verdict (whether final or provisional) that is contrary to a finding or judgment by the ECHR of a violation by of the Convention that has been published prior to the date of the signing or endorsement shall have his or her salary or other compensation permanently reduced in the year following that domestic court judgment in violation of ECHR case-law by no less than 10% nor more than 20% of the total it would otherwise be for the year, and shall receive no increase in salary or compensation for not less than 5 nor more than 10 years after the signing or endorsement of a verdict contrary to ECHR case-law.

And I make this suggestion with all my authority of being a citizen of a country in which freedom of speech and the press is recognized in the First Amendment to its Constitution.

 

[carbonjam72]

My recollection of the documentary The Central Park Five (2012), directed by Ken Burns, Sarah Burns, and David McMahon, was that the coercion occurred prior to the videotaping of their confessions. The five had each been convinced that they must say these false statements, in part in order to return to their families, if I recall the documentary correctly.

I believe the same thing has happened in the Etan Patz case, where a mentally impaired man was interrogated, i.e. prepped, for 5 hours before the police hit the record button. The judge had to determine whether to allow it in, and said yes. There is literally no other evidence against this guy (outside of a previous statement to a church group - but zero physical evidence), and there is another suspect who has indicated he will take the fifth amendment and refuse to testify. I'm amazed its going to trial.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Frank Esposito's false confession in an arson case

Frank Esposito also gave a false confession after 20 hours of interrogation. Here is a link to a brief video.

 

[Desert Fox]

I think I might have found a US Case as bad or worse than this one
Bruce Lisker was prosecuted for murdering his mother and it looks every peice of evidence was fabricated.

 

[Bob001]

I think I might have found a US Case as bad or worse than this one
Bruce Lisker was prosecuted for murdering his mother and it looks every peice of evidence was fabricated.

I had never heard of this case, but ultimately even the prosecutor agreed it was a miscarriage of justice. It looks like the evidence wasn't so much fabricated as misattributed to the wrong suspect, assisted by lying jailhouse snitches.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Lisker
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-lisker22may22-story.html#page=1

 

[Bill Williams]

My recollection of the documentary The Central Park Five (2012), directed by Ken Burns, Sarah Burns, and David McMahon, was that the coercion occurred prior to the videotaping of their confessions. The five had each been convinced that they must say these false statements, in part in order to return to their families, if I recall the documentary correctly.

Yes, the Burns documentary had them all videotaped essentially after they'd falsely confessed. IIRC the striking thing about listening to them, is they were all describing differing details which did not add up. That apparently is the hallmark of false confessions.

 

[codyjuneau]

One or more posters on this site have expressed concern that statements here may be interferences in the sovereignty of States such as Italy.

In accordance with that concern, I hereby make a suggestion for the adoption of a law in each of the Council of Europe States to minimize the caseload burden on the European Court of Human Rights. It particular, adoption by Italy would be beneficial to the Italian people and to the efficient functioning of the ECHR, but there are other States which would likewise find adoption beneficial. (They know who they are.)

The suggestion has two parts:

1. Each and every judge who signs or endorses a verdict (whether final or provisional) that later results in a finding or judgment by the ECHR of a violation by [NAME of STATE] of the Convention shall have his or her salary or other compensation permanently reduced in the year following the ECHR finding of violation by no less than 5% nor more than 10% of the total it would otherwise be for the year, and shall receive no increase in salary or compensation for not more than 3 nor less than 5 years after the ECHR finding or judgment of violation.

2. Each and every judge of [NAME of STATE] who signs or endorses a verdict (whether final or provisional) that is contrary to a finding or judgment by the ECHR of a violation by of the Convention that has been published prior to the date of the signing or endorsement shall have his or her salary or other compensation permanently reduced in the year following that domestic court judgment in violation of ECHR case-law by no less than 10% nor more than 20% of the total it would otherwise be for the year, and shall receive no increase in salary or compensation for not less than 5 nor more than 10 years after the signing or endorsement of a verdict contrary to ECHR case-law.

And I make this suggestion with all my authority of being a citizen of a country in which freedom of speech and the press is recognized in the First Amendment to its Constitution.

.
If Italian judges feel justified convicting scientists for not predicting earthquakes, then it seems justifiable that judges should be penalized for not being fair arbiters.

Cody
.

 

[Desert Fox]

I had never heard of this case, but ultimately even the prosecutor agreed it was a miscarriage of justice. It looks like the evidence wasn't so much fabricated as misattributed to the wrong suspect, assisted by lying jailhouse snitches.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Lisker
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-lisker22may22-story.html#page=1

The investigating officer claimed that he could not see his mom's body through the window where he said he could. . . .detective lied.
Same officer claimed in a parole hearing that the new owners of the house found the missing money. . . . .Officer lied again.
Officer claimed that his mother's blood was on his T-Shirt. . . .Again, the officer lied.
LAPD claimed footprint on the mother could be attributed to him without testing. . . . When tested, excluded him.

 

[Samson]

Yes, the Burns documentary had them all videotaped essentially after they'd falsely confessed. IIRC the striking thing about listening to them, is they were all describing differing details which did not add up. That apparently is the hallmark of false confessions.

How did Raffaele describe his part in the murder when he was being separately interrogated from Amanda? Can we see the transcription of all the names he brought to the table? Lumumba? Guede? Nobody? He was one tough nut to crack. No one is exploring this anomaly.

 

[platonov]

Let the exploration begin

How did Raffaele describe his part in the murder when he was being separately interrogated from Amanda? Can we see the transcription of all the names he brought to the table? Lumumba? Guede? Nobody? He was one tough nut to crack. No one is exploring this anomaly.

Really?

Faced with Q’s about inconsistencies in his story (& lies about phonecall times) he threw Britney under the bus in double quick time. [And later whined when the cops took his shoes for testing]


So why did he say she was out between 9 and 1? Start exploring.