Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[acbytesla]

First of all I have not called her a liar. You don't hesitate using the term, however. The only lie would have been in her correspondence with you as you reported it.

The genre does not require truth or footnotes. My point is that using a TCN as a source for facts is a mistake without corroboration. That goes for all of them.

There you go again. I never said she lied to me during our correspondance. She failed to follow through, but I do not call that a lie.

Sure it would be better if Nina and others provided footnotes as one could expect in a scholarly or historical book like David McCullough John Adams. (Great book btw) I agree with that.

But this does not make them fiction. What makes them fiction is their contents adherance to the truth.

 

[Grinder]

There, I fixed it for you.

Bill, "Sounds like you thought..., is the past tense. So you didn't fix it.

 

[Grinder]

There you go again. I never said she lied to me during our correspondance. She failed to follow through, but I do not call that a lie.

Tesla - I didn't say you called her a liar what I said was that if she lied it was in your correspondence. Let me explain. When she wrote something in a TCN it doesn't have to be true. It is a novel which allows for fiction even if based on a real story. But you reported that she told you it was definitely true and claimed a police report so if that wasn't true that would be a lie

Sure it would be better if Nina and others provided footnotes as one could expect in a scholarly or historical book like David McCullough John Adams. (Great book btw) I agree with that.

But this does not make them fiction. What makes them fiction is their contents adherance to the truth.

That last part makes no sense. Are you saying what makes them non-fiction is their adherence to the truth?

 

[Grinder]

Can you name a genre which "requires" truth?

Yes, you can't?

Or put another way, there is not a genre out there which would say it does not.

I get suckered into this non sequitor pointless discussion every time.

Oh go call your lawyer.

At one point you say that thTCN genre does not require truth. Then you claim you've not called Burleigh (or any of them) a liar.

Wow. If someone writes fiction then no one can claim they told lies. If you were to write a Sci-Fi book no one could say you were lying about anything because...drum-roll... it's fiction.

It's really hard to know the point being made, other than you think you're right and everyone else wrong regardless.

Hoots!

Gee everyone is it. The point is that novels about crime shouldn't be used as factual without some corroboration. I don't quibble with the vast majority of what is in these books, precisely because there is corroboration. You know, like the fact that the kids were holding the bucket and mop when they were surprised by the police.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla - I didn't say you called her a liar what I said was that if she lied it was in your correspondence. Let me explain. When she wrote something in a TCN it doesn't have to be true. It is a novel which allows for fiction even if based on a real story. But you reported that she told you it was definitely true and claimed a police report so if that wasn't true that would be a lie



That last part makes no sense. Are you saying what makes them non-fiction is their adherence to the truth?

I should have wrote their lack of adherance to the truth. But in a weird way they are both actually accurate although one way is more clear and precise.

 

[acbytesla]

Yes, you can't?



Oh go call your lawyer.



Wow. If someone writes fiction then no one can claim they told lies. If you were to write a Sci-Fi book no one could say you were lying about anything because...drum-roll... it's fiction.



Gee everyone is it. The point is that novels about crime shouldn't be used as factual without some corroboration. I don't quibble with the vast majority of what is in these books, precisely because there is corroboration. You know, like the fact that the kids were holding the bucket and mop when they were surprised by the police.

I dont care if it is called fiction or non-fiction. The only thing that can assure you that the book is true is a court decision and naybe not even then. One only need to read history to know that this is true.

 

[Bill Williams]

I dont care if it is called fiction or non-fiction. The only thing that can assure you that the book is true is a court decision and naybe not even then. One only need to read history to know that this is true.

This is the point, isn't it.

True Crime as a genre has many strengths and many weaknesses. But to equate it with fiction does a service to neither genre.

Case in point:

The point is that novels about crime shouldn't be used as factual without some corroboration. I don't quibble with the vast majority of what is in these books, precisely because there is corroboration. You know, like the fact that the kids were holding the bucket and mop when they were surprised by the police.

The point is a little bit different. The point is that NOTHING should be used as factual, really, by this definition. If the "without corroboration" is the sticking point, "corroboration" does not guarantee factuality either, it just moves the battle of definitions a little deeper.

There's little point in continuing this discussion, partly because this is not the "What distinguishes True Crime as a genre from straight fiction." Grinder has made the point continually that there is nothing to distinguish the two.

Others have said that some of the facts drilled from the TCN accounts of this cases are fully (in theory at least) falsifiable, in the sense that if they could be disproven all the tools are out there to do it.

Novels, or fiction by definition contain things which are not falsifiable - because the novel, or fiction seeks to assemble a believable narrative, despite the facts-as-offered. To pick up a novel and spend your time trying to disprove the existence of Oz or Grovers Corners means one has perhaps missed the point.

Even in fact-based texts, with footnotes, all the footnotes provide is a method to move the conversation temporarily into another venue. Perhaps this method serves as a way to disprove things, but it is quite the other thing to say that it leads to truth - any more than any other genre.

There are some times when one should listen to their lawyer.

 

[Grinder]

I dont care if it is called fiction or non-fiction. The only thing that can assure you that the book is true is a court decision and naybe not even then. One only need to read history to know that this is true.

It is obvious that you don't differentiate between fiction and non-fiction. While epistemology is an interesting theoretical discipline, it need not be so mysterious in this case. If several writers independently find the same information from multiple reliable sources, most all would agree that those things become facts. A court's verdict only means something in context of the judicial system it operates under. Surely most all history books that are annotated are more truthful than court verdicts in N. Korea.

You and "everyone" here want to believe Rudi was on a crime wave as shown by Nina. So be it.

 

[acbytesla]

It is obvious that you don't differentiate between fiction and non-fiction. While epistemology is an interesting theoretical discipline, it need not be so mysterious in this case. If several writers independently find the same information from multiple reliable sources, most all would agree that those things become facts. A court's verdict only means something in context of the judicial system it operates under. Surely most all history books that are annotated are more truthful than court verdicts in N. Korea.

You and "everyone" here want to believe Rudi was on a crime wave as shown by Nina. So be it.

Of course I differentiate between fiction and non-fiction. I just know through experience that sometimes there is more actual truth in a book labeled fiction than in books labeled non-fiction.

I have said that I believe that Ms. Diaz was Rudy's neighbor, that she was burglarized and that her mother's watch was taken. Is their confirmation from other sources? No. Is there contradiction from other sources? No. None of this means it didn't happen.

But I have never suggested that this be used to convict Rudy. That would be wrong.

True Crime is supposed to be non-fiction. However, it is clear that this distinction is often lost or ignored by some authors including Truman Capote.

 

[Grinder]

Of course I differentiate between fiction and non-fiction. I just know through experience that sometimes there is more actual truth in a book labeled fiction than in books labeled non-fiction.

Do you have an example of books written in the last few years?

I have said that I believe that Ms. Diaz was Rudy's neighbor, that she was burglarized and that her mother's watch was taken. Is their confirmation from other sources? No. Is there contradiction from other sources? No. None of this means it didn't happen.

What contradiction could be attained? How could any part of the above be proven to be false? As I said earlier, I wouldn't be surprised if there is basis for the story but not the connection to Rudi's crime wave, which is the whole point of the story being in the book.

But I have never suggested that this be used to convict Rudy. That would be wrong.

True Crime is supposed to be non-fiction. However, it is clear that this distinction is often lost or ignored by some authors including Truman Capote.

True Crime is definitely based on facts of a crime but with the allowance to make up stuff for filler.

No one has ever suggested that Nina or anyone else proposed that the story should be used against Rudi only that it adds to his crime wave list.

 

[Bill Williams]

True Crime is definitely based on facts of a crime but with the allowance to make up stuff for filler.

No one has ever suggested that Nina or anyone else proposed that the story should be used against Rudi only that it adds to his crime wave list.

Bugliosi's "Helter Skelter" is a true crime account of the Manson murders.

"True crime" is a wide genre, including doing things like multiple characters compiled into one for narrative purposes. There is no definition of true crime as a genre, other than yours, which allows for, "allowance to make up stuff for filler".

That's called fiction/lying/what-have-you.

 

[acbytesla]

Do you have an example of books written in the last few years?



What contradiction could be attained? How could any part of the above be proven to be false? As I said earlier, I wouldn't be surprised if there is basis for the story but not the connection to Rudi's crime wave, which is the whole point of the story being in the book.



True Crime is definitely based on facts of a crime but with the allowance to make up stuff for filler.

No one has ever suggested that Nina or anyone else proposed that the story should be used against Rudi only that it adds to his crime wave list.

If a book is labeled non fiction as "True Crime" is it is supposed to be "true". But that hasn't stopped authors from embellishing. As I mentioned before, the only thing stopping an author from doing this is the threat of a libel suit. But as we have discussed before the difficulties involved in pursuing legal action often allows such embellishments.

I absolutely do believe this was one of Rudy's crimes. And I do believe he was on a crime wave. Can I prove it? No But know from experience as well as from discussions with a burglary detective that many burglaries are committed by neighbors. I have never believed that Rudy was a long time burglar but a fledgling burglar making use of opportunities. Everything about his crimes screams this out.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[acbytesla]

Bugliosi's "Helter Skelter" is a true crime account of the Manson murders.

"True crime" is a wide genre, including doing things like multiple characters compiled into one for narrative purposes. There is no definition of true crime as a genre, other than yours, which allows for, "allowance to make up stuff for filler".

That's called fiction/lying/what-have-you.

Wikipedia says
True crime is a non-fiction literary and film genre in which the author examines an actual crime and details the actions of real people.
The crimes most commonly include murder, with tales of serial killers dominating the genre[1] (about 40% in a 2002 survey[2]), but true crime works have also focused on other subjects, for instance policemen memoirs, and more recently reality police TV shows.[1] Depending on the writer, true crime can adhere strictly to well-established facts in journalistic fashion, or can be highly speculative. Some true crime works are "instant books" produced quickly to capitalize on popular demand; these have been described as "more than formulaic" and hyper-conventional.[3] Others may reflect years of thoughtful research and inquiry and may have considerable literary merit.[2] Still others revisit historic crimes (or alleged crimes) and propose solutions, such as books examining political assassinations, well-known unsolved murders, or the deaths of celebrities.

Helter Skelter (1974), the true story of the Manson murders by Vincent Bugliosi is the biggest selling true crime book in publishing history, Truman Capote's In Cold Blood is number two.

 

[Anode]

I don't know, but I assume not. Still, I think the residents might have noticed a bloody knife on their lawn or even in their yard. We're just talking probabilities here, but I doubt he threw it in the yard.

If the police had pursued him as the principal suspect then I would guess they would have done a detailed search of the entire route between the apartment where Kercher was murdered and Guede's house. I think they might have found it and if they had it would have been very difficult to prosecute AK/RS because the double knife theory is pretty stupid and because the time of the last phone access pushes the TOD into the time that AK/RS have an assailable alibi even without the digestion evidence.

I'm not going to assume anything here but if the police come to the realization that some of the murder victim's property was found there and they know from phone records that she was in possession of said property just before the attack, then that yard should have become part of the crime scene and searched thoroughly. In my opinion...

 

[Bill Williams]

I'm not going to assume anything here but if the police come to the realization that some of the murder victim's property was found there and they know from phone records that she was in possession of said property just before the attack, then that yard should have become part of the crime scene and searched thoroughly. In my opinion...

You are assuming that the PLE wanted to solve the crime. Of course any competent investigator would have thrown tape around the scene where the phones were found, and closed the property - in the same way they closed Lumumba's bar where NOTHING was found.

From the Marasca report (2015) it seems what they wished was to first conjure up a theory of the crime (sex-game, faked break-in, etc.) and then & only then investigate it along those lines.

They then found a bunny-vibrator, a small jar of vaseline and a climb up to Filomena's window from the outside that no reasonably unfit 55-year-old fat guy could manage.

Caso chiuso. Add in two sets of judges who could not imagine not-a-doctor Stefanoni lying to the court, as well as more changes of alleged motive than is decent, and voila, you have Marasca and the ISC eventually putting a stop to it.

But................with enough shades of grey so that no one down the line is actually held to account.

Italy. The losers are the Kerchers.

 

[Grinder]

Here's an answer to the question about Nina's portrayal of Amanda and why AK's family didn't like aspects of the book.

I don't believe that is accurate, Grinder. 'Knox fans' didn't like the book because 'she painted less than an attractive picture' of the family, not AK.

In contrast to the health-conscious vegan on the dean’s list that her friends have described, Ms. Knox is portrayed by Ms. Burleigh as an “emotionally stunted young woman.” She got high before being questioned by police and did yoga positions in the police station while waiting — when an officer asked if she could do a cartwheel, she obliged: “Her way of expressing herself had more to do with her lack of gravitas and perhaps some kind of odd quirkiness.” The Knox family, Ms. Burleigh said, did not like the portrayal in the book. (A spokesman for the Knoxes, David Marriott, said they declined to comment.

I never knew Amanda was getting high before going to the police station but it must be true.

 

[Bill Williams]

Here's an answer to the question about Nina's portrayal of Amanda and why AK's family didn't like aspects of the book.



In contrast to the health-conscious vegan on the dean’s list that her friends have described, Ms. Knox is portrayed by Ms. Burleigh as an “emotionally stunted young woman.” She got high before being questioned by police and did yoga positions in the police station while waiting — when an officer asked if she could do a cartwheel, she obliged: “Her way of expressing herself had more to do with her lack of gravitas and perhaps some kind of odd quirkiness.” The Knox family, Ms. Burleigh said, did not like the portrayal in the book. (A spokesman for the Knoxes, David Marriott, said they declined to comment.

I never knew Amanda was getting high before going to the police station but it must be true.

Must it? Why? Who is saying that Ms. Burleigh is claiming all this?

 

[Grinder]

Must it? Why? Who is saying that Ms. Burleigh is claiming all this?

What did she claim?

This was written by a top notch journalist that wouldn't lie and risk her reputation. It was an article that Nina made herself available for and I have not read that she complained about it.

 

[Grinder]

Bill what about this quote?

In the end, though, not even those best efforts, the collapse of the forensic evidence, and a convincing appeal persuaded everyone that Amanda's inculpatory statements and call, flip behavior were not proof of a murderess, but the reaction of an emotionally stunted young woman faced with a terrifying tragedy inside her own house, and simultaneously afflicted with an ugly, suppressed, garden-variety case of college roommate envy.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill what about this quote?

In the end, though, not even those best efforts, the collapse of the forensic evidence, and a convincing appeal persuaded everyone that Amanda's inculpatory statements and call, flip behavior were not proof of a murderess, but the reaction of an emotionally stunted young woman faced with a terrifying tragedy inside her own house, and simultaneously afflicted with an ugly, suppressed, garden-variety case of college roommate envy.

I assume there's a point to this. Maybe instead of going for the "gotcha", you could first risk an opinion with regard to, "what about his quote".

It's clear I'm being suckered into something. Just not quite sure what.