Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

Thanks katy_did. It is clear the police were not objective. I love that word you used "phenomenology" and I was curious what made you select that particular word in doing your translation. The use of that word as applied to this trial is one that is amusing to me on many levels.

 

[katy_did]

Thanks katy_did. It is clear the police were not objective. I love that word you used "phenomenology" and I was curious what made you select that particular word in doing your translation. The use of that word as applied to this trial is one that is amusing to me on many levels.

Hi Rose, well I just went back and checked what the original Italian word was, and it was 'fenomenologia', so not too much of a stretch there! More of a literal translation.

But it does seem to be something that's addressed quite a lot in Raffaele's appeal in general - the word's used again in relation to Kokomani and the phenomenology of 'mass media witnesses'. His lawyers definitely seem to be concentrating on the whole issue of perception, the media, the impact of RS being considered guilty (due to the footprint, 112 call etc) from very early on, and the sort of atmosphere around the trial that almost became more important than the trial itself (as if the characters and events created by the media became 'larger than life'...)

I agree that it's a great word and very relevant here - it's crying out to be used in some cultural studies paper on the case.

 

[RoseMontague]

Hi Rose, well I just went back and checked what the original Italian word was, and it was 'fenomenologia', so not too much of a stretch there! More of a literal translation.

But it does seem to be something that's addressed quite a lot in Raffaele's appeal in general - the word's used again in relation to Kokomani and the phenomenology of 'mass media witnesses'. His lawyers definitely seem to be concentrating on the whole issue of perception, the media, the impact of RS being considered guilty (due to the footprint, 112 call etc) from very early on, and the sort of atmosphere around the trial that almost became more important than the trial itself (as if the characters and events created by the media became 'larger than life'...)

I agree that it's a great word and very relevant here - it's crying out to be used in some cultural studies paper on the case.

It does appear that the Italian word carries a very similar meaning and the use of this by Raffaele's defense team is very appropriate. The latest news of the police awarding themselves numerous awards is just an extension of this mindset. I had posted a pretty amusing comment on this but unfortunately it was not passed through by those that deem any fun is not allowed any longer for fear someone might injure themselves with too much laughter, or others have their feelings hurt by a bit of satire.

Oh well.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Comodi on the slander non-investigation

Here's an interesting campaign by EveryOne regarding the allegedly injudicious and harrassing use of "calunnia" charges. Sound familiar?

http://www.everyonegroup.com/EveryO...f_EveryOne_Groups_human_rights_defenders.html

LondonJohn,

Here is a link from Frank's blog on the non-investigation. Frank is Q and Comodi is A

"Q: What was done as investigation?
A: Nothing, what should we have done? She did it in front of everyone.
Q: You didn't think you could maybe investigate if what she said was true?
A: And what should we have done, interview the interpreter?
Q: The interpreter and all other witnesses, the suspect, the victims. Run the investigation, you know how to make them.
A: Please... there's nothing to investigate, she did the slander in public. And everybody was already heard at the trial."

 

[Dan O.]

It wasn't the police giving out the award but simply the SAP (Sindacato Autonomo di Polizia) which is a sort of police union not unlike the Fraternal Order of Police in the US. Of course they are going to stick up for their members.

 

[RoseMontague]

SAP. Hmmmmmmmmm. This from an article last year:

Knox will also again repeat claim that she was 'cuffed' across the back off the head by a female police officer during questioning - an allegation that has already been denied and brought the threat of a further slander case from Italy's main police union SAP.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...ifies-time-Meredith-Kercher-murder-trial.html

Makes me wonder if they have any current involvement in the civil case going against her and her parents at the present time.

 

[Kevinfay]

Kevin, this shows what Amanda and Raffaele are up against, when the trial judge produces a work of fiction like this. There is absolutely no evidence to support this sequence of events.

The evidence is that Meredith was murdered around 9pm on 1st November (a time when Raffaele was active on his computer); that a knife was used that has not been retrieved; and that Guede was in the room and had sexual contact with her, having entered the flat by a broken window. He had also been arrested a number of times before the murder for breaking and entering, and carrying a weapon - and was then released by the Perugia police.

Amanda and Raffaele left no trace that they had ever been in this room - Raffaele's DNA on a bra clasp contaminated with the DNA of 4 other unknown people is not sufficient to show that he was in the room. There is also no evidence to connect the kitchen knife from Raffaele's flat to the murder - the positive reading for Meredith's DNA was obtained in an improperly conducted test.

It is also clear that the Perugia police conducted an improper "investigation": all of the alleged statements by Amanda implicating herself, came from an oppressive series of interviews in which her rights were not safeguarded; they handled evidence improperly; and they negligently ignored potential evidence that might not have suited their conclusion of Amanda's and Raffaele's guilt.

Their accusations against Amanda and Raffaele of conducting a clean-up and staging the break-in are again not supported by evidence, and indeed cannot be fitted into the timescale of the crime and its discovery. Not only that, but in the weeks previous to the case (between 12-14 October), there was the unexplained death of a non-violent alleged drugs offender in the custody of the same Perugia police force (google "Aldo Bianzino").

This is a rogue police force; and it is when you recognise that the case against Raffaele and Amanda rests entirely on their assertions, the case is put in context. Those clinging to the belief that Amanda and Raffaele were involved in the murder (including the trial judge) are doing so because of a completely uncritical acceptance of the police story.

Antony,

Sorry, but I can't agree. I got interested in this case because I lived in Italy for 10 years and hung out with people very similiar to this 'cast of characters' .. I saw numerous incidents that could have ended as this one tragically did. I am interested in knowing what happened and why, not supporting the idea that AK was evil from birth or that the whole Italian state was out to get her.

Thankfully, the jury (not only the 2 judges) approached the case in the same way. The appeals will be conducted in the same way. The report dismisses the idea that the prosecution tried for two days in court to establish, that there was some kind of bad feeling between AK and MK before the murder. It dismissed as nonsense the testimony of the Albanian Holomani. It was by no means one sided.

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?. If niether was involved in the actual murder, why protect RG? and why didn't RS testify?.

AK blaming Patrick for the murder makes sense if RG had threaten her, only vampires give 'lovebites' in the middle of the throat, a scratch there is more likely to have come from a struggle or from having a knife held against it?.

It would be wonderful to have posters on the various boards who try to take a balanced view of the case, as the jurors and judges did. After following the case for over 2 years the only question that really remains for me is whether AK actually entered the room and stabbed MK. She must be given credit for testifying, her final plea to the jury seemed to say 'OK, I was there ... but don't have me branded as a murderer for the rest of my life'. After looking at all the evidence, I would be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt, but she still must serve a long sentence for all her other crimes.

A tragedy all round.

 

[katy_did]

It does appear that the Italian word carries a very similar meaning and the use of this by Raffaele's defense team is very appropriate. The latest news of the police awarding themselves numerous awards is just an extension of this mindset. I had posted a pretty amusing comment on this but unfortunately it was not passed through by those that deem any fun is not allowed any longer for fear someone might injure themselves with too much laughter, or others have their feelings hurt by a bit of satire.

Oh well.

Yes, the police awards do sort of exemplify the whole thing. They certainly represent a very subjective take on the case and the police work on it! To say the least...

I had a post disallowed earlier, too; it was a paragraph in the style of Darkness Descending (i.e. Harlequin Romance meets True Crime), in reply to one of HumanityBlue's posts. It wasn't allowed through because it was "not really suitable for a public forum", apparently (though I did appreciate the explanatory note from the mods ).

I wouldn't mind but it was nearly identical to the genuine quote from DD Chris posted later, except that mine was a bit tamer and skirted around the whole issue of bosoms (ambiguous or otherwise) rather than diving straight in like DD does. I'm annoyed now because my post would've looked amazingly prescient if it'd been allowed through.

 

[Dan O.]

Kevinfay, what you will find in this board is posters who in the true skeptic fashion won't simply accept what others say (even if they say it three times) but insist on seeing the evidence that backs up the claims. So far you have made many claims and stated that you accept the judgment of authorities but you have not produced any evidence to back up your claims.

I got interested in this case because I lived in Italy for 10 years and hung out with people very similiar to this 'cast of characters' .. I saw numerous incidents that could have ended as this one tragically did.

This says you are starting out biased. You knew people in Italy that you feel could have committed this murder and then made the association that Amanda, Raffaele, Meredith, Rudy etc. must be like the group you knew. You have provided no evidence to support this association.

I am interested in knowing what happened and why, not supporting the idea that AK was evil from birth or that the whole Italian state was out to get her.

If you are really interested in knowing what happened, you need to drop the pretense that you already know until you have the evidence. If you want to get off your soapbox and actually discuss the evidence that exists, you will find on this board much more knowledge of the actual facts in the case than perhaps any other public forum on the net.

Thankfully, the jury (not only the 2 judges) approached the case in the same way. The appeals will be conducted in the same way. The report dismisses the idea that the prosecution tried for two days in court to establish, that there was some kind of bad feeling between AK and MK before the murder. It dismissed as nonsense the testimony of the Albanian Holomani. It was by no means one sided.

This would be much easier to accept if the jury actually stayed awake through all the proceedings and not just the prosecutions presentation.

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?. If niether was involved in the actual murder, why protect RG? and why didn't RS testify?.

Here you go again, claiming facts without any supporting evidence. If Amanda and Raffaele were at Raffaele's apartment the whole time as they have always maintained then their claim that they were not at the crime scene would not be a lie. What evidence are you using to place Amanda and Raffaele at the crime scene? What cleanup are you claiming occurred at the crime scene? And who is protecting Rudy? The whole thing sounds like circular reasoning on your part... If they are guilty then they lied about not being there and if they lied about not being there then they must be guilty.

AK blaming Patrick for the murder makes sense if RG had threaten her, only vampires give 'lovebites' in the middle of the throat, a scratch there is more likely to have come from a struggle or from having a knife held against it?.

Are you simply accepting the prosecutions claim of what transpired in those interrogations that went on late into the night and early morning hours? Amanda's account written immediately afterwards is totally consistent with her being led by the prosecutors to believe a fantasy. The prosecutors documentation of those sessions was written from the point of view of the prosecutors belief of what happened and is known to be factually incorrect in parts. This interrogation took place at the request of the police in a facility designed for interrogations and by a team that was recording everything surrounding the suspects from phone calls to private conversations in the waiting room yet we are let to believe that the interrogations were not recorded.

Have you seen the hickey photo in my last post? Are you calling that a scratch? Where is your evidence of the preferred bite location for a vampire? Isn't their intent to draw blood by biting into a vein or artery? I've never heard of vampires going for the esophagus before. And where is your evidence of the distribution of hickeys? I'd venture that you haven't done any research to support your claim but simply formed a belief to match your desired conclusion. Can you show us any photos of what kind of mark a knife held against the throat makes? Knives tend to be sharp and leave cuts and not the sort of discoloration that comes from negative surface pressure drawing blood from the capillaries.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Antony,

Sorry, but I can't agree. I got interested in this case because I lived in Italy for 10 years and hung out with people very similiar to this 'cast of characters' .. I saw numerous incidents that could have ended as this one tragically did. I am interested in knowing what happened and why, not supporting the idea that AK was evil from birth or that the whole Italian state was out to get her.

Thankfully, the jury (not only the 2 judges) approached the case in the same way. The appeals will be conducted in the same way. The report dismisses the idea that the prosecution tried for two days in court to establish, that there was some kind of bad feeling between AK and MK before the murder. It dismissed as nonsense the testimony of the Albanian Holomani. It was by no means one sided.

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?. If niether was involved in the actual murder, why protect RG? and why didn't RS testify?.

AK blaming Patrick for the murder makes sense if RG had threaten her, only vampires give 'lovebites' in the middle of the throat, a scratch there is more likely to have come from a struggle or from having a knife held against it?.

It would be wonderful to have posters on the various boards who try to take a balanced view of the case, as the jurors and judges did. After following the case for over 2 years the only question that really remains for me is whether AK actually entered the room and stabbed MK. She must be given credit for testifying, her final plea to the jury seemed to say 'OK, I was there ... but don't have me branded as a murderer for the rest of my life'. After looking at all the evidence, I would be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt, but she still must serve a long sentence for all her other crimes.

A tragedy all round.

This is one of the fairly rare cases where a "balanced" view is worthless. One side is completely right, and the other side is completely wrong. Amanda had no reason to protect Guede, and if she had been there but didn't participate, she'd have every incentive to admit it. But she wasn't there. Nor was Raffaele.

This was not a case of high spirits that got out of hand. This was a brutal, sick, demented, grotesque sexual homicide. Guede did it all by himself, which is why his bloody shoe prints were on the floor, his bloody fingerprints were on a pillow under the victim's body, and his DNA was inside the victim's body.

 

[Kevinfay]

SAP. Hmmmmmmmmm. This from an article last year:



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...ifies-time-Meredith-Kercher-murder-trial.html

Makes me wonder if they have any current involvement in the civil case going against her and her parents at the present time.

Rose,

Last year the police union said in the press that they would back the charges against Knox and her family, especially since it is a high profile case and they were sick of having there members being accused of brutality as part of so many defenses. It was also discussed a lot at conferences where the police union, police chiefs and others were involved.

Fair play to them I'd say. That is what the police union is there for?. The courts will decide whether there was any merit in the accusations.

If my daugher was murdered I wouldn't want the police to be hindered by the fear of unfounded allegations. Knox could help herself by identifying the officer who she alleges struck her?.

 

[Dan O.]

My other question is that I've read in some blogs that the police took Amanda's laptop and wrecked the hard drive (suggesting that they were deliberately destroying evidence). Is this true? (I haven't been able to find confirmation of it in the Injustice in Perugia website or elsewhere.)

Antony,

It is true that the police destroyed three hard drives in this case alone. Some data was eventually recovered from one or two of the drives. The judges report on this incident makes reference to improper voltages but they are only guessing and haven't got a clue what they did wrong. To destroy one hard drive would require some amazing incompetence to be so unfamiliar with the equipment and then test it live on actual case evidence. To destroy three hard drives in a row in this way requires the special talent of Perugia's Flying Squirrels. To subsequently fail to recover these drives with a simple logic card swap makes me believe something sinister is going on. The clincher is that the judge refused to allow the defense an opportunity to have the drive professionally recovered by the manufacturer.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Makes me wonder if they have any current involvement in the civil case going against her and her parents at the present time.

I doubt it. I think pride, rather than avarice, is the main driver for the police and for other officials. They have never been involved in a case that has gotten this much global publicity, and they have royally screwed it up. Now they are desperate to redeem their public image, which accounts for the slander charges against Amanda, the charges against her parents, and these asinine awards.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene

What evidence is there that they were lying about being at the crime scene or that they attempted to clean up and alter the scene?

We've been over these issues in this thread already and as far as I can tell the evidence that they were at the crime scene or that they did any kind of clean-up comes down to the statements of witnesses whose claims are not credible for one reason or another. Is there any hard evidence at all for these claims of yours?

 

[RoseMontague]

The following is a partial list of questions commonly asked by one who believes AK and RS are guilty of one who believes they are innocent. Please feel free to jump in with your personal opinion.

How would you account for Meredith's DNA being on the blade of the double DNA knife?

I think the testing sample was likely contaminated with Meredith's DNA. Stephanoni didn't use control samples that would likely show contamination. It becomes difficult to find contamination when you don't test for it. Probably the reason it did not show up.

How would account for the abundant amount of Sollecito's DNA being on Meredith's bra clasp?

There was not an abundant amount of Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp. His appeal makes a solid case that his DNA is actually LCN.

Is it a coincidence that there were five instances of Amanda Knox's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood in three different locations in the cottage?

The only instance of Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood is in the mixed sample in the bathroom sink. Rudy washed up after killing Meredith. Amanda's DNA being in the bathroom is because she lived there. If this question is referring to the Luminol revealed footprints, they were tested for blood and there was no blood.

Who do you think cleaned up the trail of bloody footprints that led up to the blue bathmat?

There was no trail of cleaned up bloody footprints, see answer to last question.


Why were there three traces of Meredith's blood in Amanda Knox's room?

Meredith's blood was not found in Amanda's room.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?. If niether was involved in the actual murder, why protect RG? and why didn't RS testify?

Where are you getting this, Kevin? Can you provide evidence that it is a fact that Amanda and Raffaele lied about not being at the crime scene?

What makes you think they protected Rudy?

Raffaele probably didn't testify because his lawyers advised him against it. He did spontaneously stand up in court, though, to deny charges.

<snip>

It would be wonderful to have posters on the various boards who try to take a balanced view of the case, as the jurors and judges did. After following the case for over 2 years the only question that really remains for me is whether AK actually entered the room and stabbed MK. She must be given credit for testifying, her final plea to the jury seemed to say 'OK, I was there ... but don't have me branded as a murderer for the rest of my life'. After looking at all the evidence, I would be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt, but she still must serve a long sentence for all her other crimes.

A tragedy all round.

There is nothing in Amanda's testimony that suggests she said she was there. Also, she did not commit any crimes.

It doesn't sound to me as if your view of the case is very balanced, when you are relying on misinformation and false beliefs to support it.

 

[Antony]

Kevin,

Thanks for your reply and expanding on your doubts about the case. There are some points you make which I think need a response.

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?

You call this a "fact", but I don't think it is: these "lies" were either wholly invented by the Perugia police or resulted from them tricking the 2 into "explaining" so-called evidence that they (the police) falsely claimed to possess. If you disagree, then please give specific details of the "lies", confirmed by sources independent of the Perugia police.

Remember: this is a rogue police force. If you don't accept this, then you need to ask, and find answers, to equivalent questions about their behaviour to those you are now asking about Amanda and Raffaele's alleged "lies".

If niether was involved in the actual murder, why protect RG?

Sorry, this one is obvious with a little reflection. Since they weren't involved, they had no knowledge that Guede was the real killer. The question doesn't arise - except as an example of the sort of presumption of guilt that runs through much of the comment on this case.

A point worth making is that innocent people are a much easier target than real criminals, for police determined to reach a quick "solution" to a crime. Innocent people are naive and trusting; criminals are hard nuts, on their guard, and invariably nowhere near the scene.

and why didn't RS testify?.

There could be many reasons. We don't know the answer, because the police interviewed the 2 of them illegally, without making recordings or ensuring other safeguards for their rights.

AK blaming Patrick for the murder makes sense if RG had threaten her,

Again - this allegation against Amanda, that she "accused" Patrick Lumumba, arises solely from the illegal all-night interrogation she suffered, after which she signed a statement around 5.30am. This has all the signs of a coerced statement - apart from the oppressive circumstances, it was obtained without safeguards against abuse.

After following the case for over 2 years the only question that really remains for me is whether AK actually entered the room and stabbed MK.

Please read the discussions in this forum and you will quickly find other questions. Unlike most of the blogs, which are full of personal attacks, this has the advantage of being moderated.

A tragedy all round.

I don't think anyone here will disagree with that.

 

[LondonJohn]

Antony,

Sorry, but I can't agree. I got interested in this case because I lived in Italy for 10 years and hung out with people very similiar to this 'cast of characters' .. I saw numerous incidents that could have ended as this one tragically did. I am interested in knowing what happened and why, not supporting the idea that AK was evil from birth or that the whole Italian state was out to get her.

Thankfully, the jury (not only the 2 judges) approached the case in the same way. The appeals will be conducted in the same way. The report dismisses the idea that the prosecution tried for two days in court to establish, that there was some kind of bad feeling between AK and MK before the murder. It dismissed as nonsense the testimony of the Albanian Holomani. It was by no means one sided.

The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?. If niether was involved in the actual murder, why protect RG? and why didn't RS testify?.

AK blaming Patrick for the murder makes sense if RG had threaten her, only vampires give 'lovebites' in the middle of the throat, a scratch there is more likely to have come from a struggle or from having a knife held against it?.

It would be wonderful to have posters on the various boards who try to take a balanced view of the case, as the jurors and judges did. After following the case for over 2 years the only question that really remains for me is whether AK actually entered the room and stabbed MK. She must be given credit for testifying, her final plea to the jury seemed to say 'OK, I was there ... but don't have me branded as a murderer for the rest of my life'. After looking at all the evidence, I would be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt, but she still must serve a long sentence for all her other crimes.

A tragedy all round.

I totally agree that a sense of balance and perspective is critically necessary. And of course a certain amount of de facto respect must be accorded to the court of first instance. However, many of us here believe that the case put before the court may have been distorted and misleading, and that in addition the court itself may have erred in its interpretation of some of the evidence. Hopefully, this will all be examined in depth in the appeals process.

You should also (in my view) be careful of making definitive-sounding statements such as "The fact remains that AK and RS lied about not being at the crime scene and about attempting to clean up and alter the scene, why?". What you're presenting as "fact" here is far from certain, and will be challenged in the appeals. And Amanda Knox's consistent position* has been that she was not in the house at the time of the murder, and that she had nothing to do with it, so your interpretation of her testimony is a bit of a stretch. In fact, I think (and I imagine that many criminal defence lawyers would agree) that Knox should not have testified in the trial whatsoever. I certainly don't see why she should be "given credit" for having done so.

I'm not - and never have been - a rabid cheerleader for Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito. However, I do believe that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. I think that I and many others on here have taken a rational and balanced approach to analysing this case - based, admittedly, on often incomplete information. However, I agree that there are extremists at both ends of the spectrum who display signs of extreme ideological zealotry. I can, to a degree, understand those extremists on the defence side, even if I don't agree with everything they say. But in my experience the most vehement, closed-minded, and often offensive positions have come from some of those who are heavily personally invested in a "guilty" stance. And I still find that hard to figure out.

* Apart from the now-infamous false "confession/accusation", which was not only inadmissible in evidence against Knox, but which many of us believe was obtained under duress/coercion.

 

[LiamG.]

What evidence is there ... that they attempted to clean up and alter the scene?

Just one example:
In the Micheli it is written, that
Photographs of Meredith’s body show clear white areas where the bra prevented blood from falling onto Merediths body. These white areas corresponded to those areas where blood was found on her bra. This was particularly true in the area of the right shoulder strap which was soaked from the wound to Meredith’s neck.

So, this bra was obviously removed after the bleeding ended.

But hey, why not spin this around again as it is one of the main conventions in this thread.

Please read the discussions in this forum

....

the police interviewed the 2 of them illegally

 

[LondonJohn]

Does anyone know if CNN, Reuters, PA and/or the BBC are covering the release of the English language translation of the Massei Report live? Will there be a media event similar to the release of the 9/11 Commission report? It's clearly a ground-breaking event that will settle all arguments about this case once and for all, so I presume that the World's media will be chomping at the bit.