Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

But don't you think it is even just striking the fact that, when she was back in Seattle, on the first Halloween party following her release she decided to wear again exactly the same cat-burglar costume?

And as I said to Machiavelli, you can't diagnose psychopathology from the second hand reports of someon's behaviour in the aftermath of a traumatic event

If the pro-guilt lobby did not do these sorts of things, they would have no case.

For the umpteenth time, Amanda dressed as Seattle Sounder soccer player, Roger Levesque. The fact that Vibio needs to rely on a lie says it all.

For what it's worth, this is also what's wrong with appealing to "all the other evidence",once the DNA and superwitness evidence collapses. Soon Vibio will be arguing about "sex on a train," and we'll be going around that merry-go-round yet again!

 

[codyjuneau]

Planigale,

I agree with most of what you wrote, but I would hesitate to call dust a poor source. A 2008 study by Toothman et al. showed that there was enough DNA to generate called alleles. I briefly conversed with the senior author of this study in 2010 and found the interaction to helpful to my understanding of the subject.

So, DNA forensic science has managed to saw the branch it was sitting on; DNA analysis is useless now that we know that in the 1930s' dusty trunk in my attic I'll find your DNA, Chris.
In the same way that you guys here have raised the bar of reasonable doubt so high that American prisons will have to close. We live in a world of original innocence, and finally crime was always in the eye of the beholder "honis soit qui mal y pense". (How do you dare bleed you lady?!). I'm the twisted mind who sees guilt in two young persons who never managed to get one story straight.
-Eric, what did you do last night? -We had a pizza, we went for a walk along the sea, then came back and watched Forever s01e16. Story checkable, story checked, alibi verified, end of the story.

.

It was several days after the murder when Raffaele and Amanda were grilled for the details of what they did the night Meredith was murdered. Besides that, the police tag teamed them, kept them awake all night, and deliberately tried to confuse them with lies, threats, false allegations, and tales of suppressed memories.

Even so, a person might think that what they did when they found out Meredith was murdered should be imprinted in their mind, the same way 911 or President Kennedy's shooting imprinted memories. That is no doubt true, but it does not apply to the day before. In fact, I suspect that a really shocking event effectively diminishes the memories of the day before, because they are instantly rendered insignificant in comparison.

Cody
.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Gill, Vecchiotti, Conti, Hampikian, Johnson, Anjaria, and Budowle

Gill showed gross ignorance about the case making false assumtions. He stated that the police only picked up one knife from Sollecito's apartment, and that the box used for transportation was connected to Meredith.
Gill also admitted his invormation about the evidence derives from Conti and Vecchiotti. And prof. Gill was not called to testify, did not undergo any cross-questionig.

But in fact, "just because" means just because prof. Gill - like any other expert witnesses - has not just to tell his opinion, but to unfold arguments that would convince a judge. Gill simply is unable to bring arguments that are able convince rationally a person like me, and one should see what he answers to the questions that we would put (those questions to which Vecchiotti responded "everything is possible"). Gill doesn't have any new argument besides the arguments that were already presented by equivalent experts such as prof. Tagliabracci, which were already assessed and found unconvincing by the courts, as well as by the guilters.

Machiavelli,

Show me where he said this. Because until you do, I am calling it a bunch of rose fertilizer. Every knowledgeable who looks at the YSTR gram comes to an almost identical conclusion. Every knowledgeable person who looks at the collection videos laughs, then cries. Every knowledgeable person who ponders the knife realizes that one cannot clean it selectively. Professor Gill does not need anyone's help to interpret the data. The fact that he devoted a chapter to this case in his book should tell everyone a great deal--everyone who is willing to listen.

I have explained many times why the identity of the box (shoe box, calendar box, or whatever) is unimportant. I have also explained that Gill never said it came from Meredith in his book. Therefore, I think that this was more likely to be Ruth Alexander's mistake. However, it is not a central issue to the many problems with respect to the knife. It is just a well-worn PG diversionary tactic to avoid examining them.

One of the many problems of this case is that the SCC chose to believe less qualified prosecution witnesses over more qualified defense and independent witnesses.

 

[Numbers]

Apparently, Dershowitz has told AFP this:

"Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz told AFP he believes "she will be extradited if it's (the guilty verdict) upheld."

"The Italian legal system, though I don't love it, is a legitimate legal system and we have a treaty with Italy so I don't see how we would resist," he said."

http://www.newsmax.com/World/GlobalTalk/Italy-Britain-US-murder/2015/03/23/id/631850/

This seems a strange statement from a lawyer who may be aware that the extradition treaty allows for refusal to extradite, and that under Reid v Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty".

Extradition of Amanda Knox would be contrary to Amendments 4, 5, and 6 of the US Constitution, in that the US government would be endorsing the Italian violation of those rights of a US citizen.

 

[Desert Fox]

This seems a strange statement from a lawyer who may be aware that the extradition treaty allows for refusal to extradite, and that under Reid v Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty".

Extradition of Amanda Knox would be contrary to Amendments 4, 5, and 6 of the US Constitution, in that the US government would be endorsing the Italian violation of those rights of a US citizen.

I suspect that if it were a male rape defendant, he would be arguing that he could not be extradited. I thing that is honestly how he rolls.

The recent claims against him seem to be extraordinary but he seems to have a clear track record as far as supporting men in these kind of cases.

 

[GreyFox]

I'm no DNA expert either but if Steph was a dentist would you want her sticking that dirty glove in your mouth ? I think not.

 

[js202]

And prof. Gill was not called to testify, did not undergo any cross-questionig.

You mean like Rudy Guede, whose inability to be cross-examined whilst making accusations before a *sympathetic* judge alone demonstrates what a clown show the Italian legal system happens to be?

Gill simply is unable to bring arguments that are able convince rationally a person like me, and one should see what he answers to the questions that we would put (those questions to which Vecchiotti responded "everything is possible").

Herein lies the source of your dilemma. To quote the Bard, aptly:

"The fault, [dear Machiavelli], is not in our stars
But in ourselves..."

 

[Kauffer]

Gill showed gross ignorance about the case making false assumtions. He stated that the police only picked up one knife from Sollecito's apartment, and that the box used for transportation was connected to Meredith.
Gill also admitted his invormation about the evidence derives from Conti and Vecchiotti.
And prof. Gill was not called to testify, did not undergo any cross-questionig.

But in fact, "just because" means just because prof. Gill - like any other expert witnesses - has not just to tell his opinion, but to unfold arguments that would convince a judge. Gill simply is unable to bring arguments that are able convince rationally a person like me, and one should see what he answers to the questions that we would put (those questions to which Vecchiotti responded "everything is possible"). Gill doesn't have any new argument besides the arguments that were already presented by equivalent experts such as prof. Tagliabracci, which were already assessed and found unconvincing by the courts, as well as by the guilters.

This is from McCall's wiki

"Asked about other knives Finzi testified that he did not collect any additional knives from the kitchen but that he did collect a second knife from Sollecito's bedroom."

But not from the kitchen eh? How very very odd, don't you think?

 

[Diocletus]

I'm no DNA expert either but if Steph was a dentist would you want her sticking that dirty glove in your mouth ? I think not.

Heck, I wouldn't let her touch me even if she were a proctologist.

ETA: Well, at least she'd have to take that dirty glove off, first.

 

[Diocletus]

This is from McCall's wiki

"Asked about other knives Finzi testified that he did not collect any additional knives from the kitchen but that he did collect a second knife from Sollecito's bedroom."

But not from the kitchen eh? How very very odd, don't you think?

Yeah, there was a little flick knife that they collected in his bedroom. Not even remotely useful as a piece of evidence.

The point is the selection from a knife-filled drawer of a single knife. No one cares about the flick knife.

 

[kwill]

Apparently, Dershowitz has told AFP this:

"Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz told AFP he believes "she will be extradited if it's (the guilty verdict) upheld."

"The Italian legal system, though I don't love it, is a legitimate legal system and we have a treaty with Italy so I don't see how we would resist," he said."

http://www.newsmax.com/World/GlobalTalk/Italy-Britain-US-murder/2015/03/23/id/631850/

Oy. That guy. First he helps defend OJ Simpson. Then this:

Dershowitz provided legal assistance to friend and reported billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who was investigated following accusations that he had repeatedly solicited sex from minors. Dershowitz investigated some of Epstein's accusers and provided both the police and the State attorney’s office with a dossier containing information about their personal behavior, which had been obtained from their personal MySpace pages, including allegations of alcohol and drug use. Eventually, in 2008, Epstein pled guilty to a single state charge of soliciting prostitution and began serving an 18-month sentence.

Sounds like an awesome person and one whose opinions have great importance. NOT.

 

[Numbers]

There are a few parallels to the AK-RS case in the Debra Milke case:

Woman who spent 22 years on death row has murder case tossed

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-...22-years-on-death-row-has-murder-case-tossed/

 

[Kauffer]

This seems a strange statement from a lawyer who may be aware that the extradition treaty allows for refusal to extradite, and that under Reid v Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty".

Extradition of Amanda Knox would be contrary to Amendments 4, 5, and 6 of the US Constitution, in that the US government would be endorsing the Italian violation of those rights of a US citizen.

The last time he pronounced about this case he was selling a book, but he got his facts wrong; he's a strange fish.

 

[RWVBWL]

I'm no DNA expert either but if Steph was a dentist would you want her sticking that dirty glove in your mouth?

I think not.

Classic!
Now if only someone had asked Judge Giancarlo Massei
and Judge Beatrice Cristiani this question...

But hey, what do I know,
maybe Italian's Judges like dentistry which allows DDS or DMD,
wearing visibly dirty, contaminated gloves,
that pick up dropped extracting forceps, bone files, dental scalers, and mouth mirrors
from an un-clean floor shoved into their mouths as they have dentistry done.

RW

 

[NancyS]

I'm no DNA expert either but if Steph was a dentist would you want her sticking that dirty glove in your mouth ? I think not.

She wouldn't be allowed anywhere near a hospital :infectioncontrol:

 

[Vibio]

Another truly informative post by Mach:

Eric Wilson admitted he was lying. Amanda Knox claimed false mmory syndrome.

Eric Wilson accused himself first. Amanda Knox accused another person.

Amanda Knox released talse testimonies and false accusations repeatedly, and she repeatedly invoked her right to remain silent when she was given the chance to explain why she made a false accusation.

Eric Wilson was beign questioned by police. Amanda Knox was releasing a spontaneous statements before a magistrate without being questioned, and then she wrote further false accusations herself on her own initiative.

Amanda Knox had released a non credible account (a false testimony) even before her questioning of Nov. 5. (see het Nov. 4. mail to "everybody").

Eric Wilson confessed after a 9 consecutive hour interrogation, Amanda Knox accused another person after 2.5.

Amanda Knox wrote statements that are obviously sophisticated and manipulative and showing her being in full control of herself.

Amanda Knox also placed evidence against Sollecito ("blood on hands") after she was told he had withdrawn her alibi.

Raffaele Sollecito declared he had told a load of lies to the police on Amanda's request.

In the US this stuff would get get you thrown in the slammer sooooo fast.

 

[NancyS]

Another truly informative post by Mach:

In the US this stuff would get get you thrown in the slammer sooooo fast.

Informative in what way exactly - and I would add that I hope police who hit people they are questioning, are also thrown in the slammer. And tell me again what happened to the tapes of the illegal interrogation? And no I won't accept that Mignini's hamster ate them

 

[Dougm]

Isn't what Nina Burleigh reports in The Fatal Gift of Beauty at p.178? Saying she whimpered and wept "for nearly two hours straight".

Burleigh is certainly not a guilter source, someone must have told her.
But don't you think it is even just striking the fact that, when she was back in Seattle, on the first Halloween party following her release she decided to wear again exactly the same cat-burglar costume?

Again you are either completely misinformed, or are choosing to lie to make Amanda Knox look bad. Anyone that knows anything about this knows that her costume for Halloween after her release was not a cat "burglar", but rather a local Seattle soccer player.

You are so biased against her that your mind just jumps to the worst possible explanation for everything.

 

[Sonia]

Again you are either completely misinformed, or are choosing to lie to make Amanda Knox look bad. Anyone that knows anything about this knows that her costume for Halloween after her release was not a cat "burglar", but rather a local Seattle soccer player.

You are so biased against her that your mind just jumps to the worst possible explanation for everything.

Not to mention the sobbing reference does not seem to exist. I've flipped through all the pages about Halloween in my Kindle copy of Burleigh's book, and there's nothing about Amanda doing any such thing.

A mistake on Machiavelli's part, or is it part of his being completely misinformed?

 

[Kauffer]

For example Knox sobbing on Halloween night because Meredith didn't answer her messages.

Hey! Where's the citation? Nobody can find it. Where did you get this idea from?