Amanda Knox - Your Verdict

[Aepervius]

Jeez if they hang the jury where you are , when they can't be unanimous, I hope I never get jury duty.

Just kidding. I voted guilty. Because I trust the Italian justice system and because the Italian jury has got *all* the fact the prosecution and defence wanted to give. And all we have is gossip, cartwheel, and misinformation.

 

[tsig]

Jeez if they hang the jury where you are , when they can't be unanimous, I hope I never get jury duty.

Just kidding. I voted guilty. Because I trust the Italian justice system and because the Italian jury has got *all* the fact the prosecution and defence wanted to give. And all we have is gossip, cartwheel, and misinformation.

Thanks for a the response.

This has been an educational experience for me, I thought I'd get a lot of flack on the post but so far it's the wording of the options that has drawn the most comment.

 

[quadraginta]

Why do you hate threads?

He's from Pern.

 

[Rolfe]

Maybe we should have a poll on who has a) read and b) followed that 12,000-post thread.

Me, I gave up on about page 5.

Rolfe.

 

[uk_dave]

I have followed it and learnt many new and interesting things, such as:

• Ladies sometimes share bras, regardless of body shape
  
• Police sometimes suspect cute girls of murder because they're horny
  
• The press reporting of a court case is not to be trusted except when it is
  
• Sometimes the police will plant evidence in order to convict innocent people and make sure the real killer doesn't walk free
  
• Italians are funny people
  
• Americans are funny people
  
• Internet sleuths play an important part in modern day murder investigations
  
• Google is your friend

 

[Bruce Fischer]

The cartwheel thread is as useless as this poll. Yet, I still visit the cartwheel thread and I voted. Sometimes useless things get attention. If this wasn't the case, the snuggie would not be in every household.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I never said "reality is a democracy" nor that her guilt or innocence depends on any way on the JREF forum.

If you wish to disagree with me please use my words not yours.

I think what we have here is a failure to comprehend a point.

I didn't say that you said those things. My point was that your thread was pointless unless one of those things was true.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Motive: None
Initial reason to suspect Knox and her boyfriend: A loony prosecutor who imagined Satanic ritual killings. Think McMartin preschool.
Murder weapon: Not found and the supposed blood found on the knife from the boyfriend's apartment makes no sense except as a lab contaminant in light of the fact it doesn't match the victim's wounds.
Touch DNA of the boyfriend on the victim's bra which lay for weeks in the apartment he hung out in (Amanda lived there) before police collected it: that evidence would have been discredited by any good defense attorney.
Occam's razor: They caught the guy who did it. There was a massive amount of DNA and other evidence implicating him.

Why would convicting someone on such a flakey evidence and such a weak case provide any justice whatsoever for Kercher?

What a sad thread for a skeptic's forum.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Motive: None
Initial reason to suspect Knox and her boyfriend: A loony prosecutor who imagined Satanic ritual killings. Think McMartin preschool.
Murder weapon: Not found and the supposed blood found on the knife from the boyfriend's apartment makes no sense except as a lab contaminant in light of the fact it doesn't match the victim's wounds.
Touch DNA of the boyfriend on the victim's bra which lay for weeks in the apartment he hung out in (Amanda lived there) before police collected it: that evidence would have been discredited by any good defense attorney.
Occam's razor: They caught the guy who did it. There was a massive amount of DNA and other evidence implicating him.

Why would convicting someone on such a flakey evidence and such a weak case provide any justice whatsoever for Kercher?

What a sad thread for a skeptic's forum.

Read the thread you started. The evidence is far more substantial than you present here

 

[m-n-m]

Poll Question: Amanda Knox - Your Verdict

What's the point of that? Reality isn't a democracy, and Knox's guilt or innocence has nothing to do with how many forumites think she did it.

Seems to me it is simply a poll question regarding a 'hot' topic on a popular site.

I voted guilty, by the way.

 

[Kestrel]

Motive: None
Initial reason to suspect Knox and her boyfriend: A loony prosecutor who imagined Satanic ritual killings. Think McMartin preschool.
Murder weapon: Not found and the supposed blood found on the knife from the boyfriend's apartment makes no sense except as a lab contaminant in light of the fact it doesn't match the victim's wounds.
Touch DNA of the boyfriend on the victim's bra which lay for weeks in the apartment he hung out in (Amanda lived there) before police collected it: that evidence would have been discredited by any good defense attorney.
Occam's razor: They caught the guy who did it. There was a massive amount of DNA and other evidence implicating him.

Why would convicting someone on such a flakey evidence and such a weak case provide any justice whatsoever for Kercher?

What a sad thread for a skeptic's forum.

I feel the same way.

Too many of those on JREF confuse support for the authorities with being a skeptic. When a judge writes that a murder was motivated by reading manga comics and smoking marijuana, the science or logic behind this reasoning isn't questioned.

 

[m-n-m]

Will voting on the poll end that other thread?

It depends on how you voted.

 

[m-n-m]

Motive: None
Initial reason to suspect Knox and her boyfriend: A loony prosecutor who imagined Satanic ritual killings. Think McMartin preschool.
Murder weapon: Not found and the supposed blood found on the knife from the boyfriend's apartment makes no sense except as a lab contaminant in light of the fact it doesn't match the victim's wounds.
Touch DNA of the boyfriend on the victim's bra which lay for weeks in the apartment he hung out in (Amanda lived there) before police collected it: that evidence would have been discredited by any good defense attorney.
Occam's razor: They caught the guy who did it. There was a massive amount of DNA and other evidence implicating him.

Why would convicting someone on such a flakey evidence and such a weak case provide any justice whatsoever for Kercher?

What a sad thread for a skeptic's forum.

So you're sticking with your original premise? It really was the cartwheel?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I feel the same way.

Too many of those on JREF confuse support for the authorities with being a skeptic. When a judge writes that a murder was motivated by reading manga comics and smoking marijuana, the science or logic behind this reasoning isn't questioned.

No, I think you've confused "just say no" with being a skeptic. There is little, to no, reason to believe the evidence does not point to what the Court has agreed it points to.

 

[tsig]

I think what we have here is a failure to comprehend a point.

I didn't say that you said those things. My point was that your thread was pointless unless one of those things was true.

You admit I didn't say the words but you still insist on your interpretation of words I didn't say.

 

[uk_dave]

Too many of those on JREF confuse support for the authorities with being a skeptic.

No, nice try. Actually that is the same accusations 911 truthers and climate truthers make.

It's amazing the similarities.

A belief that a conspiracy is covering up the 'truth'
An overblown belief in ones own ability to investigate a crime/issue via google and youtube
A misguided reliance on individuals who have their own agenda
Household experiments with breaking glass and throwing rocks
A belief in the absolute accuracy of press coverage (when it suits your position)

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

You admit I didn't say the words but you still insist on your interpretation of words I didn't say.

Nonsense. I am not attributing any claim to you at all.

I am making the claim that since reality is not a democracy, and since Knox's guilt or innocence has nothing to do with how many forumites think she did it, this thread is pointless regardless of whether Knox is guilty or not (and like Rolfe I haven't followed the other thread in enough detail to feel entitled to an opinion on Knox's guilt).

 

[Damien Evans]

Maybe we should have a poll on who has a) read and b) followed that 12,000-post thread.

Me, I gave up on about page 5.

Rolfe.

You got 2 pages further than me.

 

[Matthew Best]

With 68 votes cast so far, I'd say the result is a hung jury.

 

[Kestrel]

No, nice try. Actually that is the same accusations 911 truthers and climate truthers make.

It's amazing the similarities.

A belief that a conspiracy is covering up the 'truth'
An overblown belief in ones own ability to investigate a crime/issue via google and youtube
A misguided reliance on individuals who have their own agenda
Household experiments with breaking glass and throwing rocks
A belief in the absolute accuracy of press coverage (when it suits your position)

The 911 and climate truthers have been claiming that the scientific establishment, including our national labs such as a NIST and NCAR are part of the conspiracy and coverup.

Supporters of Amanda Knox on the other hand have been quoting articles in peer reviewed scientific journals. We don't have to invoke a conspiracy of scientists because the scientific establishment is on our side. For example, we can simply point to the established protocols designed to assure that DNA evidence is not contaminated and show that these protocols were not followed by the Italian investigators.

Knox supporters are not claiming a coverup in the murder room. That evidence pointing to two suspects was cleaned up while leaving plenty of evidence pointing to a third. Somehow removing microscopic biological traces while not leaving evidence of cleaning. We simply point out the more reasonable alternative, that the evidence pointing to those two suspects was never there in the first place.

The conspiracy theory in this case comes from the prosecution. Given evidence pointing to burglary attempt gone wrong that turns into rape and murder, they came up with a conspiracy between three persons, one of whom was barely known by the other two.