Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

Do you have any evidence at all in support of this narrative Dan_O?

Yes, what Fiona asked. And Dan_O also needs reminding that the police in Italy NEVER release tapes of interviews to ANYONE. In other words, no tapes in this case is absolutely normal in Italy. Of course, Dan_O is free to support his conspiracy theory by offering evidence that it isn't normal in Italy.

 

[shuttlt]

Fiona,

I'm pretty sure that Dan O. is correct that they asked her a few questions while she was in the waiting room. But I don't see it matters that much. It's not as if Amanda claims this period was "intense", or claims to have been hit, or have any imaginary scenarious put to her. The only questions that I am aware of her being asked during this period are about what boys had visited the appartment. What does it matter? What does it prove? What line of reasoning does it form part of?

 

[shuttlt]

Yes, what Fiona asked. And Dan_O also needs reminding that the police in Italy NEVER release tapes of interviews to ANYONE. In other words, no tapes in this case is absolutely normal in Italy. Of course, Dan_O is free to support his conspiracy theory by offering evidence that it isn't normal in Italy.

Presumably if somebody wanted to pursue a claim that they had been abused in an interrogation any tapes that existed would have to be released?

 

[Kermit]

Go for it.

Why would you think that the Perugia police have tried so hard to cover up the recording of the interviews that night? The tapes prove exactly what happened in those interviews and can't be spun like the recollections of the officers involved.

.
Dan O., I personally don't know if there are tapes or not of Amanda's interview on 5 Nov 2007. She did go in to the interview as a witness. I am not aware, for example, that there are audio tapes of the interviews with Filomena and Laura.

If the tapes do exist, I would assume that one of the reasons we haven't heard them is that Amanda's legal team fought so hard to ensure her constitutional right to not have those sessions entered into the record.

If you think that it would be helpful, try to convince Luciano Ghirga to withdraw Amanda's constitutional protection. I personally would like to see more of exactly what Amanda said on 5 Nov 2007.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Presumably if somebody wanted to pursue a claim that they had been abused in an interrogation any tapes that existed would have to be released?

No. It would be investigated and listened to by a judge. If the claims were found to be justified, then it would be released to a court.

 

[shuttlt]

No. It would be investigated and listened to by a judge. If the claims were found to be justified, then it would be released to a court.

OK. I guess we'd be talking about some kind of civil claim in this case anyway. Otherwise it would be some kind of internal affairs department who I guess would have all the access they needed.

 

[Fulcanelli]

OK. I guess we'd be talking about some kind of civil claim in this case anyway. Otherwise it would be some kind of internal affairs department who I guess would have all the access they needed.

No, it would be a prosecutor. And it wouldn't be classed as civil but criminal. And indeed, this is what happened, when Amanda made the accusation in court the prosecutor opened an investigation.

 

[shuttlt]

No, it would be a prosecutor. And it wouldn't be classed as civil but criminal. And indeed, this is what happened, when Amanda made the accusation in court the prosecutor opened an investigation.

Sure, because a potential crime that ould be being investigated. OK.

 

[Dan O.]

Did you hear the one about investigating Amanda's claim that she was hit during the interrogation?

They investigated it by saying that none of the officers involved that gave testimony in court testified that Amanda was hit.

This is apparently the way things work in Italy. There is no independent oversight of the police.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Sure, because a potential crime that ould be being investigated. OK.

Yes. Under Italian law, if an allegation of a crime has been made the prosecutor has to open an investigation, he/she is legally bound to do so. In this case, a crime certainly had been committed. If Amanda's accusations were true, then her being struck is a crime. If her allegations were false, then that too is a crime as it's criminal slander (making false accusations).

 

[Fulcanelli]

Did you hear the one about investigating Amanda's claim that she was hit during the interrogation?

They investigated it by saying that none of the officers involved that gave testimony in court testified that Amanda was hit.

This is apparently the way things work in Italy. There is no independent oversight of the police.

More was investigated then that. Amanda's statements were examined and the police were asked if the interrogation had been recorded, to which they stated that it hadn't (any tapes had it been recorded would have been examined).

But it is true that all the police officers on the stand in the trial were asked about Amanda being struck and they testified under OATH (unlike Amanda) that she was not. Crucially, so did the independent translator who was there during the interrogation.

But Dan_O, perhaps you can tell us how or what else they could have investigated? Since everyone had been questioned on the matter what else was the prosecutor supposed to do?

 

[Kermit]

Did you hear the one about investigating Amanda's claim that she was hit during the interrogation?

They investigated it by saying that none of the officers involved that gave testimony in court testified that Amanda was hit.

This is apparently the way things work in Italy. There is no independent oversight of the police.

.
In addition to the police officers testifying, we have Amanda's own lawyer Luciano Ghirga who declared to the press a year earlier that Amanda had not been physically mistreated.

How strange that, coinciding with a visit by her stepfather Chris Mellas (who also likes to exhort to people to "kneel and pray") to Perugia, Amanda stood up in court and made a spontaneous statement concerning being hit.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

But Dan_O, perhaps you can tell us how or what else they could have investigated? Since everyone had been questioned on the matter what else was the prosecutor supposed to do?

Since everyone but Knox was in on the conspiracy against Knox no one's testimony except for hers can be relied upon, and even then you have to pick the right testimony, because of fatigue ... and injected memories ... and visions ... and drugs ... and stuff like that.

Certainly the logic behind this should be obvious.

 

[Kermit]

Since everyone but Knox was in on the conspiracy against Knox no one's testimony except for hers can be relied upon, and even then you have to pick the right testimony, because of fatigue ... and injected memories ... and visions ... and drugs ... and stuff like that.

Certainly the logic behind this should be obvious.

.
Quadraginta, I think you've been following FOA speeches too much ... you're starting to think like them!

I swear that that sounds like something Paul Ciolini or Anne Bremner would say.

 

[Dan O.]

Crucially, so did the independent translator who was there during the interrogation.

What independent translator was that? The one that the police call on when they are interrogating suspects without their lawyer present?

Is there any evidence that Anna Donnino is anything other than "an interpreter for the Perugia police" (ref)

 

[Kermit]

What independent translator was that? The one that the police call on when they are interrogating suspects without their lawyer present?

.
No, I think Fulcanelli is referring to the translator the police used when questioning witnesses before a lawyer is needed or required.

Up until then, had Amanda said anything which would allow her to be classified as a "suspect"? Being a suspect is a formal state. A police investigator can not simply classify someone as a suspect on a whim.

Did Filomena and Laura have lawyers accompanying them?

 

[shuttlt]

Dan O.,

Could you possibly post something that explains your position on the whole the police suspect someone/someone is a formal suspect issue so tha t we can move on. This whole pretending you are unaware of a distinction thing is getting really old. If you've got a point to make in regard to the issue, please make it.

 

[Fulcanelli]

What independent translator was that? The one that the police call on when they are interrogating suspects without their lawyer present?

Is there any evidence that Anna Donnino is anything other than "an interpreter for the Perugia police" (ref)

But she's not the police. She was present. She testified, under oath. Was she lying? Do you have any evidence she was lying? Does she have an established history of lying? Amanda does. I know who's more credible.

 

[Kermit]

Dan O., Could you possibly post something that explains your position

Clarity and explanation of a position is asking for alot.

I'm still waiting to see the Mystery of the Rotated Slides (I hear CBS 48 Hours is going to dedicate a show to it)

 

[shuttlt]

Clarity and explanation of a position is asking for alot.

I'm still waiting to see the Mystery of the Rotated Slides (I hear CBS 48 Hours is going to dedicate a show to it)

I'd forgotten about them. It seems like so longer ago. Simpler times....