• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
HumanityBlues said:
Nope. How does it help your argument that they held off arresting Gacy, a notorious murderer?
Click to expand...

I don't know: Don't arrest people until they have a crawlspace filled with decomposing children? That's the lesson I'm learning; how about you?
 
stilicho said:
I don't know: Don't arrest people until they have a crawlspace filled with decomposing children? That's the lesson I'm learning; how about you?
Click to expand...
Patrick had dead bodies in his crawl space?

I do believe we've been speaking about the arrest of Patrick that morning.
 
stilicho said:
We're still waiting for you to explain how the Perugia police were supposed to know that Amanda lied ("unreliable" to quote you).
Click to expand...

More and more surreal - in the correct Dali-esque meaning of the word.

You're suggesting here that the police had no right or reason to suspect that AK was an unreliable witness. Note first the difference between "lied" and "was unreliable". The latter (which is what I actually wrote) implies clearly that the police could have reasonably suspected that AK MIGHT BE LYING - not that they should have KNOWN that that she DID lie - in her accusation of Lumumba. It therefore REDUCES the probative value of AK's accusation - I've never argued that it should have REMOVED the probative value of the accusation.

And the reason why the police could reasonably have had a right to suspect that AK was an unreliable witness was this: She'd just radically changed her alibi. I'd call this unreliable. Wouldn't you? If AK had made her confession/accusation in her first police interrogation, without ever claiming any other version of events, THEN the police might have been justified in regarding her accusation as credible and trustworthy. In addition to that major reason, there's another reason to doubt her reliability: the confession/accusation was plainly made under a condition of pretty extreme duress. And while some might argue correctly, in my view) that the consequent 05.45 written confession was made in a more considered and calm way, it's still inextricably linked to the 01.45 breakdown, and in addition it was not made in the presence of any counsel.
 
HumanityBlues said:
I did what now?
Click to expand...

Correction: "...your reasons for anyone introducing.." I can't see how it relates.

Different jurisdiction.
Different crime.
Different outcome.

Edited by LashL: 
Removed breach of Rule 12.
How many days/weeks/months should Amanda and Raffaele have sat in protective custody in prison while the police followed Patrick around Perugia? Or do we let them all out and follow all of them around for days/weeks/months to see who they'll murder next?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
HumanityBlues said:
Do you not see the irony of what you just said within the context of what you were responding to?:boggled:
Click to expand...

It appears from his subsequent posts that indeed he didn't see the irony in it. The fact that he appeared to believe that CW was actually equating AK, RS, RG or Lumumba with Gacy (and that others subsequently agreed with his analysis) provides a worrying insight into certain posters' analytical abilities, I'd suggest..........
 
LondonJohn said:
More and more surreal - in the correct Dali-esque meaning of the word.

You're suggesting here that the police had no right or reason to suspect that AK was an unreliable witness. Note first the difference between "lied" and "was unreliable". The latter (which is what I actually wrote) implies clearly that the police could have reasonably suspected that AK MIGHT BE LYING - not that they should have KNOWN that that she DID lie - in her accusation of Lumumba. It therefore REDUCES the probative value of AK's accusation - I've never argued that it should have REMOVED the probative value of the accusation.

And the reason why the police could reasonably have had a right to suspect that AK was an unreliable witness was this: She'd just radically changed her alibi. I'd call this unreliable. Wouldn't you? If AK had made her confession/accusation in her first police interrogation, without ever claiming any other version of events, THEN the police might have been justified in regarding her accusation as credible and trustworthy. In addition to that major reason, there's another reason to doubt her reliability: the confession/accusation was plainly made under a condition of pretty extreme duress. And while some might argue correctly, in my view) that the consequent 05.45 written confession was made in a more considered and calm way, it's still inextricably linked to the 01.45 breakdown, and in addition it was not made in the presence of any counsel.
Click to expand...

LJ, Amanda literally drew them sketches. She didn't just handwave an accusation. She had the details and supplied them to the police. That's why they arrested Patrick--not simply one or two words. All of this was ruled inadmissible as it should be but it has a great deal of bearing on why the police believed Amanda.
 
stilicho said:
Correction: "...your reasons for anyone introducing.." I can't see how it relates.

Different jurisdiction.
Different crime.
Different outcome.

It's another "Constable LJ Hokey Pokey" routine. How many days/weeks/months should Amanda and Raffaele have sat in protective custody in prison while the police followed Patrick around Perugia? Or do we let them all out and follow all of them around for days/weeks/months to see who they'll murder next?
Click to expand...

Yes, every case has different facts. So what? You can still draw comparisons. Charlie never even assessed the wisdom of how Gacy was handled or made a value judgment. I still don't think you understand Charlie's basic point, which to be honest, didn't even seem like he found it that significant. Moreover, your response to him was plainly weak.
 
stilicho said:
Correction: "...your reasons for anyone introducing.." I can't see how it relates.

Different jurisdiction.
Different crime.
Different outcome.

Edited by LashL: 
Removed quoted moderated content
How many days/weeks/months should Amanda and Raffaele have sat in protective custody in prison while the police followed Patrick around Perugia? Or do we let them all out and follow all of them around for days/weeks/months to see who they'll murder next?
Click to expand...

Careful with your repetition of the whole "Constable LJ" stuff. But just for your information, in case you're planning to use it once again, "Hokey Pokey" is a flavour of ice cream. "Hokey Cokey" is the name of the dance that I think you're meaning to refer to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
stilicho said:
Correction: "...your reasons for anyone introducing.." I can't see how it relates.

Different jurisdiction.
Different crime.
Different outcome.

Edited by LashL: 
Removed quoted moderated content.
How many days/weeks/months should Amanda and Raffaele have sat in protective custody in prison while the police followed Patrick around Perugia? Or do we let them all out and follow all of them around for days/weeks/months to see who they'll murder next?
Click to expand...

The truth is, they arrested a man and held him for two weeks with unreliable information. They knew this information was unreliable because they knew how it was obtained.

Why not bring him in for questioning first?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LondonJohn said:
Careful with your repetition of the whole "Constable LJ" stuff. But just for your information, in case you're planning to use it once again, "Hokey Pokey" is a flavour of ice cream. "Hokey Cokey" is the name of the dance that I think you're meaning to refer to.
Click to expand...
The Hokey Cokey is also known as the Hokey Pokey, and according to wiki, the original tune was named Hokey Pokey after the ice cream.
 
stilicho said:
LJ, Amanda literally drew them sketches. She didn't just handwave an accusation. She had the details and supplied them to the police. That's why they arrested Patrick--not simply one or two words. All of this was ruled inadmissible as it should be but it has a great deal of bearing on why the police believed Amanda.
Click to expand...

Just out of interest, how do we know the level of detail in these sketches? Were they admitted in evidence during the Lumumba Vs AK slander trial? Or has AK referred to them in detail in her own subsequent accounts? Or is it that have the police verbally testified to the creation of these detailed crime scene sketches in their testimony to the court?

And what unique detail was given? AK knew Meredith's room layout, and she had already claimed to have seen at least part of the body when the door was broken open. I realise that this in itself is open to argument - since some contend that AK was nowhere near the door when it was broken open, and cannot therefore have had a chance to see Meredith's foot or her general position. But others at the scene definitely DID see all. Has it been conclusively established that none of the proven eyewitnesses to the discovery ever discussed the scene with AK.

And lastly, as you might know, I believe that there might well have been a element of "suggestion" from the police to AK leading up to her confession. I realise again that you believe otherwise. But any potential "suggestion" might well have included some pretty specific details of the crime scene that were known to the police. So AK might (only might) have been simply regurgitating these facts back to the police within the confession/accusation.
 
Agatha said:
The Hokey Cokey is also known as the Hokey Pokey, and according to wiki, the original tune was named Hokey Pokey after the ice cream.
Click to expand...

Well, just for clarification, since we're now into an in-depth study of ice cream, whimsical songs, and silly dances, which was my fault in the first place.......

The inspiration for the wartime participation song (with built-in dance steps), might or might not have been the "Hokey Pokey" flavour of ice cream. But even if it was, the song's title (and by extension the dance's title) was soon changed to "Hokey Cokey" - again for a possible variety of reasons. I can state with near certainty that the song and dance movements are both nowadays solely referred to in the UK as the "Hokey Cokey", as I believe has been the case since at least one generation removed from mine. Not that we all DO the "Hokey Cokey" on a regular basis, you understand....... :p
 
LondonJohn said:
Well, just for clarification, since we're now into an in-depth study of ice cream, whimsical songs, and silly dances, which was my fault in the first place.......

The inspiration for the wartime participation song (with built-in dance steps), might or might not have been the "Hokey Pokey" flavour of ice cream. But even if it was, the song's title (and by extension the dance's title) was soon changed to "Hokey Cokey" - again for a possible variety of reasons. I can state with near certainty that the song and dance movements are both nowadays solely referred to in the UK as the "Hokey Cokey", as I believe has been the case since at least one generation removed from mine. Not that we all DO the "Hokey Cokey" on a regular basis, you understand....... :p
Click to expand...

It's called the hokey pokey in the US.
 
LondonJohn said:
Just out of interest, how do we know the level of detail in these sketches? Were they admitted in evidence during the Lumumba Vs AK slander trial? Or has AK referred to them in detail in her own subsequent accounts? Or is it that have the police verbally testified to the creation of these detailed crime scene sketches in their testimony to the court?
Click to expand...

The best person to ask about that is Charlie. He has information regarding the case that few others have unless it has been redacted by the family. If you PM'd him then he would likely tell you more than he would on the forum board.
 
You may note that I am in the UK, England to be precise, I know what it is called here. It's an international site, though; not all the posters to whom you are speaking are in the UK. Allowing for international differences - in song titles, in justice systems, in cultural norms - is therefore sensible IMO.

That all sounded terribly pompous, sorry! I blame it on my amazement at the end of Ashes to Ashes. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom