Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[stilicho]

Nope.

Now I have to wonder if there is a publicly available justification of the award. I can't see why there would be since it would probably be even more revealing than the book itself.

I read some stuff about the journalist, though, and she seems to have had her offices raided more than once. Once was over articles written about the 2001 Genoa G8 summit protests. That doesn't sound too healthy.

 

[shuttlt]

Presumably it would be possible to research the liable case, but is there any point? What is it's significance to the discussion? Perhaps the police gave the diary to the newspaper, perhaps the newspaper abused some confidence from the family, perhaps the route by which they acquired the diary is more complicated still? There are certainly errors in the translation of the diary that may allow us to do some kind of textual analysis to track this. It seems many of the original quotes were translated into Italian, and then back into English. If we really care, some progress can be made, but do we really care? Both sides released sections of the diary.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

As I understand it, Amanda couldn't remember who the text message was from, until she had had some time to figure it out. I would be the same way -- who remembers a text message from four days ago? Can you imagine how many of her friends and family she had been in touch with in the interveniing four days?

The question is how the text message came to be presented at the interrogation. Do you think the police repeatedly asked Amanda to remember what happened the night of the crime and she said, "Wait, let me look at my phone?" Or do you think the police presented the text message to her and asked her to remember what and who it was about?

I tend to favor the latter. Which leads back to the suggestion that the police were prepared with a line of questioning about Patrick, which leads back to why they did not question Patrick in a conventional way without interrogating Amanda.

She couldn't remember what happened at the crime scene because she wasn't there. That is illustrated by the fact that she described things that didn't happen, such as seeing Patrick go into the bedroom with Meredith and hearing Meredith scream.

Can you establish that Amanda was not truthful in an way before her interrogation? If not, there is more evidence that the police lied than that Amanda did.

I already did. You know, where I quoted Raffaele's prison diary in which he clearly states that Amanda had asked him to lie about her whereabouts on the night of the murder.

 

[Jungle Jim]

Back on page 257, post #10280 Alt+F4 posted a link to the blog of Candance Dempsey which attempts to layout a time line for Nov. 2nd. She quotes Raffaele describing how he and Amanda entered the cottage that day:

"Amanda unlocked the door and I went in. I noticed that Filomena's door was open. There was glass on the floor and the room was a mess. Amanda's door was open but the room was tidy. Then I went to Meredith's door and saw it was locked. First, I checked to see if what Amanda had told me about the blood in the bathroom was true. I noticed there were drops of blood in the sink and there was something strange on the bathmat, a mixture of blood and water, while the rest of the bathroom was clean. Nothing else was out of place.

Ms. Dempsey's source for this statement is an Italian web site that includes an English translation of portions of Rafaele's statements to the police made on Nov. 5th. It can be seen here. However, the Italian site does not state how they came across these statements. Maybe someone knows more about statements Rafaelle made to the police that were released. I bring this up because in Amanda's trial testimony (June 12, 2007; audio #12) she states that the door to Filomenia's room was closed when she arrived at the cottage the first time on Nov. 2nd.

"I was with Raffaele at that moment, because it was the second time that
I went back to the house. The first time I went back to the house, Filomena's door was closed, so I didn't look inside, I didn't think to. The
first time I went into the house, I called "Is anybody home?" and there
wasn't anybody, so I just went about my own affairs. Then, going back
to the house, with Raffaele, I looked around a bit to see how things really
were, and I discovered the broken window. That's when I thought "Mamma mia,
a robbery," and I called Filomena to tell her, "Look, your window's broken and
there's a mess in your room. But -- nothing's been touched."

I always wondered why Amanda did not look into her roommates' rooms when she found the open front door, traces of blood, and feces in the second bathroom. Clearly something was amiss in the cottage. If Rafaelle's statement to the police is correct, it blows a hole in Amanda's story of her visit to the cottage in the morning. After all, she walked passed Filomenia's room at least four times according to her testimony.

 

[lector]

lector wrote:

Charlie that FOA page you linked is peculiar & doesn't illustrate anything to me. There's no context. Where did those images (other than the crime scene photo) come from? Who created them? What are they supposed to show? It doesn't make sense to me.

The images are from a document prepared by the scientific police. They used the technique Lee describes to trace the blood droplets back to a point of origin, just a foot or so above the floor. If the victim had been surrounded by attackers, their presence would have interfered with the spray of blood droplets on the wardrobe doors. And there were blood droplets on the floor surrounding the spot where she was killed:

www.friendsofamanda.org/bloodstain_pattern.jpg

You can see a couple of rectangular spots where books were lying on the floor. Otherwise nothing interfered with the distribution of blood droplets. She had a single attacker on top of her. There were also round blood droplets on her exposed breasts, which means she was on her back when she bled to death, not kneeling as the prosecution tried to claim.

This is why Massei has had to take refuge in vagaries, suggesting that, well, yes, it's true that a single attacker cannot be excluded. It's as though I run a stop sign and T-bone someone at an intersection, and when the insurance adjuster calls, I say, "well, yes, it's true that the damage to the other vehicle doesn't exclude the possibility that I ran the stop sign."

Thanks. I think I get the idea.

It's not conclusive, to me. I see the distribution as indicating what the conditions may have been at one particular moment. I don't see it as inconsistent with the notion of either single or multiple attackers.

Anyway I understand the thinking now & I appreciate your response.

 

[stilicho]

If we really care, some progress can be made, but do we really care? Both sides released sections of the diary.

Did they? How do you know this?

I think the sources are pretty important given the implications, insinuations, and innuendo. I'm prepared to admit that, in the main, we don't have enough information to say conclusively. We know for certain that a number of individuals were offered the diaries by the Knox/Mellas family and/or the lawyers. All the diaries? With conditions? Maybe that's where the "who cares" comes in. We don't know that the authorities did unless you have a cite I don't have.

Remember: My interest in this whole case is how it's presented in the media and especially the glowingly positive assessment of AK (mainly) and RS (somewhat) in North America. If we can nail down the source of those pesky "leaks" it would help me understand how the negative image wasn't exported across the Atlantic.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

stilicho - your comment is more ridiculous that the 53 hour interrogation claim. Amanda was under a lot of pressure. It was coming from multiple people and she was scared. In fact, the interrogators lied to her and scared the hell out of her.

Interestingly, I'm sure Patrick faced the same thing - and actually worse. Not only did the Police attempt to elicit a confession, he had already been accused by an "eyewitness". He was, quite literally, screwed until his friend managed to save the day by providing his alibi.

And yet, somehow, he managed to resist confessing, much less accusing another innocent person due to "false memories".

I have no doubt that the Police were yelling at him to "remember" what he was doing that night, inserting "false memories" as best they could, etc.

And Patrick is an immigrant - so he wasn't a native Italian speaker either.


Are you saying Patrick is just a tougher cookie than Amanda?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I assume the former prosecutor has experience that informs his claim.

Most knife collector (and there are thousands) do not commit murder with their collectible knives.

And most mothers don't drown their children. Doesn't mean it never happens.

 

[shuttlt]

I'll see what I can do Stilicho. I think it's a hard line to defend that there were no bits of the diary in official press releases. I vaguely recollect there being some documentation to support that there were official releases of this kind.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi Shuttlt,
Re: "Mary, I did quite a bit of digging into the way the diary came out."

If you would do quite a bit of digging into trying to find the identity of the person that left the 13 un-attributed fingerprints at the murder scene, the identitiy of the person Mr. Alessi mentions, the identity of the person that Miss Formica mentions, and the identity of the person that disconnected the burglar alarm at the break-in at the lawyers offfice, I bet you might solve who actually stabbed Miss Kercher to death that night...
More speculation from the beaches of L.A.
RWVBWL

 

[Fiona]

Interestingly, I'm sure Patrick faced the same thing - and actually worse. Not only did the Police attempt to elicit a confession, he had already been accused by an "eyewitness". He was, quite literally, screwed until his friend managed to save the day by providing his alibi.

And yet, somehow, he managed to resist confessing, much less accusing another innocent person due to "false memories".

I have no doubt that the Police were yelling at him to "remember" what he was doing that night, inserting "false memories" as best they could, etc.

And Patrick is an immigrant - so he wasn't a native Italian speaker either.


Are you saying Patrick is just a tougher cookie than Amanda?

I am sure he did. However he is older and that is in itself a protection from that kind of thing, according to what I have read. I believe he had been in Italy a long time and so it is likely his italian is good, though I do not know for certain

The real problem with the articles I have read about false confessions and induced memories has already been mentioned: most instances involve people who are vulnerable in some way such as mental instability; extreme youth; mental disability; trauma of various sorts etc: and I have not seen any studies where there has been a very short interrogation with this result: most appear to be 6 hours or more: there are a few cases where less than 6 hours is cited but no more specific time than that which I have found. Amanda was an adult with no known mental health problems and she was in tertiary education. She may have been traumatised by Meredith's death, but there is no evidence which shows that in comparison with the other people who were also interviewed several times in the same period, she was taking it worse

That is not to say that one cannot find instances of people with no particular vulnerabilities who succumbed to false memory in a short time: but they do not seem to be the norm.

 

[shuttlt]

Hi Shuttlt,
Re: "Mary, I did quite a bit of digging into the way the diary came out."

If you would do quite a bit of digging into trying to find the identity of the person that left the 13 un-attributed fingerprints at the murder scene, the identitiy of the person Mr. Alessi mentions, the identity of the person that Miss Formica mentions, and the identity of the person that disconnected the burglar alarm at the break-in at the lawyers offfice, I bet you might solve who actually stabbed Miss Kercher to death that night...
More speculation from the beaches of L.A.
RWVBWL

Thankyou so much for your kind suggestion. If you feel this stuff is important and want to dig into it you are welcome to do so. If you think there is any likelihood of the internet providing answers to these questions I have no idea what you are wasting your time bothering me for. Off you go and crack this case wide open.

 

[Fulcanelli]

The fact that the press are interested in a case doesn't mean they deservse information about it. From the looks of things, the Perugian police called up their pals at the local paper and invited them over to the crime scene the minute they found the body.

It would be one thing if they reported only facts, but it wasn't long before the prosecution's whole case against Amanda, pink bunny vibrator and all, was in the international media. What purpose was there in providing that kind of information to the press other than to prejudice them?

Why shouldn't the press be given information about it? Why shouldn't they see photos of the crime scene? What do you want, a police state?

So what about the vibrator? It's the FOA who love to keep bringing up the vibrator and talking about it...nobody else cares.

Information was given to the public for the public's right to know.

I believe HumanityBlues and I were asking you to explain why the shopkeeper's information was considered to be relevant evidence.

I don't know...because of the sexual nature to the event and the fact they were on trial for a SEX MURDER? And because it showed they were hardly cut up about Meredith's murder and...mat even have been turned on by it.

And a wife-beater wouldn't have to beat his wife if she would only behave.

Hyperbole.

 

[Fulcanelli]

No, I'm saying exactly the opposite. Nobody seemed to have a problem with Amanda's account of things until the interrogation. Suddenly they changed their approach.

Err...that would be because Raffaele changed his story and dropped her alibi. It would also have been to do with the fact they found the text message on her phone when she had previously told them that nobody had contacted her and vice versa that night and that test message also read to them as though she wad going to meet someone that night. All on top of her weird behaviour during the previous days.

That's what changed.

 

[John Albert]

In the U.S. witnesses are not "afforded attorneys during questioning if they ask for one". They can request that their attorney be present during such questioning, but there is no obligation for the state to provide one. So that part is wrong. For that matter even formally charged suspects are not just afforded an attorney. They can demand that their own be present, or subsequent to a determination of indigence, they can have one provided.

Sorry, I misspoke. "Afforded" was not the word I ought to have used.

 

[Fulcanelli]

As I understand it, Amanda couldn't remember who the text message was from, until she had had some time to figure it out. I would be the same way -- who remembers a text message from four days ago? Can you imagine how many of her friends and family she had been in touch with in the interveniing four days?

Actually, they would have asked her the day right after the murder if she had contacted anyone and vice versa the previous evening.

Why would she not remember? She wouldn't recognise the number when they showed it to her? But hey, she seemed to remember it was Patrick when she blurted out "It was him, he's bad, he did it!"

 

[Fulcanelli]

I did not claim the story became newsworthy through the efforts of the Italian police. I am sure the police recognized it as newsworthy immediately.

My concern was about why so much superfluous and prejudicial information was shared with the press. For example, what possible justification was there for leaking Amanda's diary?

Amanda's family and their lawyers leaked the diary.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Wasn't the diary originally released to the press by her own lawyers?

EDIT: Go back to Page 202. That's where the Telegraph link sourcing Ghirga as the leak was originally posted.

And Barbie Nadeau got her copy from Vedova. And Chris Mellas offered the diary to PMF (when it was the True Crime Weblog Message Board). Just after he offered it to PMF, Frank Sfarzo had a copy as did Candace Dempsey.

 

[Mary_H]

I already did. You know, where I quoted Raffaele's prison diary in which he clearly states that Amanda had asked him to lie about her whereabouts on the night of the murder.

Is there any chance you could provide that quote again, as well as the link for where it came from? I don't know which page of this thread it is on.

 

[Fulcanelli]

On Monday, November 5 the police started talking to Amanda at 22:30, she signed a statement over 3 hours later at 1:45 the next morning. It doesn't take three hours or adjust chairs.

That's funny, considering Amanda called Filomena ar 22:29 and had a conversation that lasted several minutes and Amanda was doing cartwheels in the police waiting room at 23:00.

Marco Quintavalle was the shopkeeper who claimed to have seen Amanda outside his store on the morning after Meredith was killed. Claims to have recognized Amanda from seeing her in the news four days after the murder. But he didn't come forward at that time. He also didn't mention seeing Amanda when an officer came to ask questions about the crime a few days later. It was almost a year after the crime when he started telling his story.

An employee who was working at the store that day testified that Amanda wasn't there.

That's because the police didn't ask him about Amanda, they only asked him about Raffael.

He recognised Amanda when he saw her come in his shop because he'd seen her before with Sollecito. But her didn't know it was she that had been arrested for murder until he saw it in the paper days later. He didn't come forward because he didn't think it important as the police had only asked him about Raffaele.