Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kestrel said:
The excuses were given upthread, but only the JREF authoritarians accepted the explanation.
Click to expand...

You are, again, being obtuse, Kestrel.

Is it by choice or by design?


It was not merely an excuse that was presented up thread. It was the actual, you know, legal proceedings/laws of the Country in which the murder, trial, and interrogations occurred.
 
Amazer said:
Do you have evidence that Italian policy routinely record witnesses?
Click to expand...

This is a debate that will never be resolved on this thread. this will be brought up on appeal and we will see how it plays out.

We will never know exactly what happened in that interrogation room. I believe that they scared the hell out of Amanda. They demanded a name. They were suggesting the name they wanted was the name of the person that text was sent to. They said "you know what name we want"

Amanda broke down and gave them what they wanted. She gave them the name of the person that the text was sent to. The police demanded it. The police suggested Patrick to Amanda when they repeatedly yelled at her and demanded the name.

She said what they wanted to hear to get herself out of that situation. When she was out of that hostile environment, she tried to explain that her statement was not possible and she signed it at a time of extreme exhaustion and stress. The police didn't care. They arrested Patrick anyway.

The police went and arrested Patrick with no other evidence at all. Why were they so quick to accept the information obtained in the manner that is obtained.
 
BobTheDonkey said:
It was not merely an excuse that was presented up thread. It was the actual, you know, legal proceedings/laws of the Country in which the murder, trial, and interrogations occurred.
Click to expand...

Are you saying it is illegal for the police to record witness interrogations according to the Laws of Italy?

Not trying to be difficult but I am struggling to understand why the interview would not have been taped.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
This is a debate that will never be resolved on this thread. this will be brought up on appeal and we will see how it plays out.

We will never know exactly what happened in that interrogation room. I believe that they scared the hell out of Amanda. They demanded a name. They were suggesting the name they wanted was the name of the person that text was sent to. They said "you know what name we want"

Amanda broke down and gave them what they wanted. She gave them the name of the person that the text was sent to. The police demanded it. The police suggested Patrick to Amanda when they repeatedly yelled at her and demanded the name.

She said what they wanted to hear to get herself out of that situation. When she was out of that hostile environment, she tried to explain that her statement was not possible and she signed it at a time of extreme exhaustion and stress. The police didn't care. They arrested Patrick anyway.

The police went and arrested Patrick with no other evidence at all. Why were they so quick to accept the information obtained in the manner that is obtained.
Click to expand...

If she's that pliable then this argument works equally well to explain why Amanda went along with the murder.

Cite hilited?
 
tsig said:
If she's that pliable then this argument works equally well to explain why Amanda went along with the murder.

Cite hilited?
Click to expand...

Amanda went along with the murder? I was not aware of that.

Mignini said she was the leader.
 
tsig said:
Poison the well much?
Click to expand...

The interrogators knew exactly what they were doing. Amanda asked if she should have a lawyer. They said it would be worse for her if she did.

They scared the hell out of her and received unreliable information in return. They took this unreliable information and arrested Patrick. They should have investigated Patrick further of course but they did not.
 
Juror said:
Are you saying it is illegal for the police to record witness interrogations according to the Laws of Italy?

Not trying to be difficult but I am struggling to understand why the interview would not have been taped.
Click to expand...

Because it would not be admissible in court.

I know, if you ran the Italian Justice System it would be perfect.
 
Amazer said:
Do you have evidence that Italian policy routinely record witnesses?
Click to expand...

This is a debate that will never be resolved here. She was being treated as a suspect, not a witness. She should have had an attorney.

Repeat your beliefs again. Then I will repeat mine. This is an endless cycle when it comes to the interrogation.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
This is a debate that will never be resolved here. She was being treated as a suspect, not a witness. She should have had an attorney.
Repeat your beliefs again. Then I will repeat mine. This is an endless cycle when it comes to the interrogation.
Click to expand...

Given the performance of her attorneys to date I can't see there would be any difference.

Amanda lied an innocent man into jail. Dance, divert and distract that fact is damming.
 
tsig said:
Given the performance of her attorneys to date I can't see there would be any difference.

Amanda lied an innocent man into jail. Dance, divert and distract that fact is damming.
Click to expand...

If she had an attorney, the interrogation would have never happened.

Making sarcastic comments about her attorneys really has no purpose here.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
The interrogators knew exactly what they were doing. Amanda asked if she should have a lawyer. They said it would be worse for her if she did.

They scared the hell out of her and received unreliable information in return. They took this unreliable information and arrested Patrick. They should have investigated Patrick further of course but they did not.
Click to expand...

Which is why Patrick is sitting in prison, just like Amanda and Raffaele...oh, wait, but he's not...
 
Bruce Fisher said:
The interrogators knew exactly what they were doing. Amanda asked if she should have a lawyer. They said it would be worse for her if she did.

They scared the hell out of her and received unreliable information in return. They took this unreliable information and arrested Patrick. They should have investigated Patrick further of course but they did not.
Click to expand...

Cite? There were no recordings, remember.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
If she had an attorney, the interrogation would have never happened.

Making sarcastic comments about her attorneys really has no purpose here.
Click to expand...

Amanda lied an innocent man into jail. Dance, divert and distract that fact is damming.
 
Juror said:
Are you saying it is illegal for the police to record witness interrogations according to the Laws of Italy?

Not trying to be difficult but I am struggling to understand why the interview would not have been taped.
Click to expand...

The story, Juror, is that when they took Amanda into the interrogation room, she was "only a witness," and it is not required that witnesses' statements be recorded. Allegedly, according to the police, once she incriminated herself, she became a suspect and the interrogation was halted.

You wrote: "I would think the police would have insisted on recording the interrogation for both documentation of evidence purposes and protect themselves from potential accusations of mischief later."

Yes, that is the most reasonable expectation. The fact that they have no fear of those accusations (which have already been made) says quite a bit about the closed situation over there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom