Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Charlie Wilkes]

Does anyone know about what time in Italy the court will announce?

I am told it could be as early as 4-5 am tomorrow.

 

[Kaosium]

I am told it could be as early as 4-5 am tomorrow.

Thanks for the update, Charlie, I was wondering that myself.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I am told it could be as early as 4-5 am tomorrow.

Depending on where you are, what would eastern time be? Thanx

 

[lonepinealex]

I am told it could be as early as 4-5 am tomorrow.

What's that for us Brits?

 

[TruthCalls]

But Mignini didn't really make any case based on the personality of Amanda Knox. On the other hand judges Micheli, Matteini and Ricciarelli did draw some psychological profiles of the two defendants. Those are the only judges who actully pointed out psychological features and dynamics.
Then prosecution and courts became progressively less interested in psychological aspects.
I don't think there was nothing wrong on the part of Mignini in pointing out that Knox had an intent of revenge and humiliation of Meredith, it's just unavoidable for the prosecution and judges to express their own ideas about the dynamic of the crime. This doesn't equate to an in-depth psychological analysis of personalities and motives. Anyway Mignini is not a psychologist and I won't take his opinion as a psychological analysis about the true and deep reasons of behaviours.

Does this somehow make things better? It doesn't matter what Mignini did, it's the entirety of the judicial system that formed opinions of Amanda that were not supported by historical behavior or professional assessment that underscores the problem.

But Mignini didn't really make any case based on the personality of Amanda Knox.

I don't think there was nothing wrong on the part of Mignini in pointing out that Knox had an intent of revenge and humiliation of Meredith

Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

I don't think there was nothing wrong on the part of Mignini in pointing out that Knox had an intent of revenge and humiliation of Meredith, it's just unavoidable for the prosecution and judges to express their own ideas about the dynamic of the crime.

Are you nuts? There is NOTHING to suggest Amanda had ANY intent towards Meredith, humiliation or otherwise. And it is precisely the fact that these prosecutors and judges publicly confirm their belief of Amanda's behavior, which is diametrically opposed to reality, that turns this case into the injustice that it is. IF the judges had made a factual, logical, reasonable assessment of Amanda and her relationship with Meredith it would have become immediately clear there is no way she committed the crime. Lack of motive, lack of timeline and lack of physical evidence in the murder room all make it very clear Amanda and Raffaele were not involved. Amanda and Meredith were friends. They spent significant time together enjoying each others company. The things they did together prior to the murder if proof of this. This is history and not even you can twist it so as to undo it. Testimony of those closest to them prove a normal friendship. Raffaele didn't even really know Meredith so there was no chance something happened between them to motivate him to commit such a crime. With no history of violent behavior, it's no wonder the judges had to fabricate things to justify their verdicts.

 

[sept79]

One should not mistake the cultural traits of Italian guilters for a psychological disorder...or wait...maybe a cultural trait can be a psychological disorder...it's found among some of the Italian judiciary as well.

Actually, this psychological disorder trait is found among many of the Italian judiciary . . .

 

[TruthCalls]

The door had been already disassembled by other police forces, prior to the Dec. 17. visit of Stefanoni's team. It was no longer in place.

The door was still in the cottage. The door jam was still in place, and one could assume Raffaele touched that as well.

This does not somehow diminish the fact the SP did NOT do a proper forensic investigation. Their explanation for not testing the door handle is idiotic.

This does not somehow diminish the fact that Stefanoni improperly picked up the clasp, fondling it with visibly dirty gloves, including rubbing one of the two metal hooks. Incompetent doesn't even begin to say it.

 

[TruthCalls]

Don't you forget a little detail, among the assessment levels?
The judges.
It's the judges who will determine the meaning of each single evidence finding, based on its relationship with the context of the other evidence. Not the experts.

Who could forget? Wasn't it the judges, who ignored six of seven experts who concluded the injuries were compatible or consistent with a lone attacker, and concluded three attackers? Wasn't it the judges who ignored TMB and DNA analysis results and concluded the Luminol prints were made from Meredith's blood anyway? Wasn't it the judges who ignored TMB, Human Antibody and DNA quantification results and concluded Meredith's DNA WAS on the blade after all? It is something no one forget. The judges consistently remind us science, facts and logic are no match for osmosis reasoning.

 

[carbonjam72]

I am told it could be as early as 4-5 am tomorrow.

Is that Pacific or Eastern US? Or something else?

 

[Anode]

Is that Pacific or Eastern US? Or something else?

I assumed he meant Seattle time, which would put it about high noon in Italy?

 

[Vibio]

Although you did also invent something called 'narcissistic rage'

Narcissistic rage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_rage_and_narcissistic_injury

 

[RWVBWL]

Does anyone know about what time in Italy the court will announce?

I recall reading over the last day or so that Court starts from 10:00am onward, in Italy.
Is that correct Vibio?

 

[carbonjam72]

The door was still in the cottage. The door jam was still in place, and one could assume Raffaele touched that as well.

This does not somehow diminish the fact the SP did NOT do a proper forensic investigation. Their explanation for not testing the door handle is idiotic.

This does not somehow diminish the fact that Stefanoni improperly picked up the clasp, fondling it with visibly dirty gloves, including rubbing one of the two metal hooks. Incompetent doesn't even begin to say it.

By the way, one of the theories for contamination, was Raf's handling the door handle on the outside of the room, and the forensic police transferring it via their unchanged dirty gloves. The DNA mixed traces were found on the clasp but not the fabric, and the gloved hand is seen touching the clasp. This may actually be video of the actual contamination event, except DNA can't be seen to verify it (except during a selective clean-up apparently, if you can believe it).

 

[carbonjam72]

I assumed he meant Seattle time, which would put it about high noon in Italy?

Makes sense. If they start around 10am, and arguments I think are short, like 20 minutes each? So that sounds about right. But they could also announce it the next day too.

 

[acbytesla]

Machiavelli's posts about Amanda Knox's personality are completely out of line, and without factual basis. They are not supported by anyone who knows her, or anyone who has ever met her. Just because a few college girls found some of her behavior annoying does not make her anything out of the ordinary, nor does it indicate she is mean or angry. Those who know her well have testified she is one of the kindest people they have ever met.

Taking some random incidents where she was interacting with various other college students, all of which are completely normal occurrences in college life, and trying to twist them into some bizarre scenario where she is somehow full of rage and some sort of sexual lust/revenge feelings says WAY more about the individual posting this garbage than it ever will about Amanda Knox.

I can personally vouch for the fact that Amanda Knox is nothing like the person he is trying to invent. His version is a completely fabricated fantasy.

While I would bet that your assessment of Amanda's character to being much closer to the truth than Mach's wild fantasies, I know that I cannot vouch for Amanda because that would be based on total heresay. That said I cannot condemn her either for the same reason. This is something we shouldn't do. From my perspective based on the available evidence, there is absolutely nothing that would make me believe Amanda is anything other than an average woman of her age. And as time passes it becomes even more clear.

 

[Dougm]

Narcissistic rage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_rage_and_narcissistic_injury

And not a single bit of this applies to Amanda Knox. Except in some invented fantasy. The real person is neither a Narcissist, nor violent.

 

[Vibio]

And then there is this:

It doesn't sound like you have the first idea regarding the complexity of diagnosing personality disorders - although I would again note that you are possibly displaying some narcissistic traits by imagining you have the skills to do this, even without the most basic of psychiatry training.

Oh please....Mach is giving his opinion. He's not a doctor...was not on the jury...is not a judge.

All during high profile trials, people give their personal opinions about the mental state of the criminals. Something unusual about it?

And often professionals who have never examined nor ever met a Jodi Arias or Casey Anthony or Scott Peterson will post their obligatory HuffPost article about their mental issues.

And it's done all the time around the water cooler.

Amanda Knox might be a special snowflake to you and deserve special treatment but to most of us she's just not.

 

[Kauffer]

And then there is this:




Oh please....Mach is giving his opinion. He's not a doctor...was not on the jury...is not a judge.

All during high profile trials, people give their personal opinions about the mental state of the criminals. Something unusual about it?

And often professionals who have never examined nor ever met a Jodi Arias or Casey Anthony or Scott Peterson will post their obligatory HuffPost article about their mental issues.

And it's done all the time around the water cooler.

Amanda Knox might be a special snowflake to you and deserve special treatment but to most of us she's just not.

I see. So it's perfectly reasonable for him to label her as a vengeful lesbian psychopath, is it?

The problem is of course, he's not one of these

 

[Vibio]

The problem is of course, he's not one of these

Did he say he was?

 

[TruthCalls]

And then there is this:




Oh please....Mach is giving his opinion. He's not a doctor...was not on the jury...is not a judge.

All during high profile trials, people give their personal opinions about the mental state of the criminals. Something unusual about it?

And often professionals who have never examined nor ever met a Jodi Arias or Casey Anthony or Scott Peterson will post their obligatory HuffPost article about their mental issues.

And it's done all the time around the water cooler.

Amanda Knox might be a special snowflake to you and deserve special treatment but to most of us she's just not.

Not a "special snowflake", just a normal person who deserves the same assumption of normalcy as everyone else. Mach likes to project himself as someone with special insight into this case. Therefore, it is perfectly acceptable to challenge his opinions and point out he has neither the evidence or the experience to support them.

Most professionals will tell you it is very difficult to properly analyze someone, even when given significant face time. Most reputable professionals scoff at the media whores who claim to be able to provide some 'educated insight' into the mind of someone by watching a few hours of video.