Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris C]

Not at all, I'm talking about everything, the Judge's interpretation of the evidence, the coroner’s, the police, the witnesses, how the DNA was collected and tested, every aspect of this trial and yes, even that cartwheel which is how this thread originally got started, everything. Both sides in this debate have some very good points, the Guilter's and the FOAKer's, and both side have some very weak points as well, this is why I'm saying, the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

Yeah you believe that knox and sollecito should go to jail. Yet you think they had nothing to do with the murder and rape. Here is a better way to look at this. If one of your own friends was on trial and he said he didn't do it. After reviewing the evidence would you believe him. Would you think that person should be convicted on what was shown.
You ever get a speeding ticket? Cop pulls you over and says sir you was doing 55 in a 40. Can i see your license and insurance. You give him your information. You can then ask to see proof you was speeding. He might or might not show you.
This murder trial is like a speeding ticket. Prosecution says we have evidence. Defense says show us. Prosecution says no.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Yeah you believe that knox and sollecito should go to jail. Yet you think they had nothing to do with the murder and rape. Here is a better way to look at this. If one of your own friends was on trial and he said he didn't do it. After reviewing the evidence would you believe him. Would you think that person should be convicted on what was shown.
You ever get a speeding ticket? Cop pulls you over and says sir you was doing 55 in a 40. Can i see your license and insurance. You give him your information. You can then ask to see proof you was speeding. He might or might not show you.
This murder trial is like a speeding ticket. Prosecution says we have evidence. Defense says show us. Prosecution says no.

Chris, I'm not even going to respond to this other than to ask you to re-read the posts your responding to......

 

[Scorpion NITE]

No, the only bare footprints that where found in hallway where smaller. They tried to attribute them to Knox. Except neither amanda or meredith's dna where in the footprints. They also didn't bother comparing them to anyone other than amanda's footprints. Though I do remember mention of a footprint in amanda's room that couldn't be attributed to her. Can't remember off hand who they tried to say it belonged to.

I also recollect that there was an attempt to attribute them to Amanda, which is why I was puzzled when ChristianaHannah appeared to suggest that the Bathmat print was linked to a print found in the hallway and I thought it was ChristianaHannah's contention that the Bathmat print belongs to Sollecito, as gleaned from the Motivations report. Maybe I understood the posts incorrectly and I apologise if that is the case.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

luminol led to dilation of the image

I also recollect that there was an attempt to attribute them to Amanda, which is why I was puzzled when ChristianaHannah appeared to suggest that the Bathmat print was linked to a print found in the hallway and I thought it was ChristianaHannah's contention that the Bathmat print belongs to Sollecito, as gleaned from the Motivations report. Maybe I understood the posts incorrectly and I apologise if that is the case.

I was also under the impression that one of the luminol prints had been declared compatible with Amanda, but I will defer to those who have greater acquaintance with the appropriate section in the Massei report. However, I will reiterate a problem I have had with the luminol prints ever since I read Colonel Garofano's statements in Darkness Descending. He said that the luminol solution was applied too heavily, leading to dilution of the image and loss of detail.

 

[Chris C]

I also recollect that there was an attempt to attribute them to Amanda, which is why I was puzzled when ChristianaHannah appeared to suggest that the Bathmat print was linked to a print found in the hallway and I thought it was ChristianaHannah's contention that the Bathmat print belongs to Sollecito, as gleaned from the Motivations report. Maybe I understood the posts incorrectly and I apologise if that is the case.

The problem with the footprints is the only ones they truely where able to pin on someone was Rudy's. 1st they matched the shoe type and shoe size of a brand of shoes that belonged to him and 2nd, he admitted they where his. You see here is the problem which I have never seen a discussion about. If the only place blood was on his shoes was the bottom, why did he throw them away.

 

[Chris C]

Chris, I'm not even going to respond to this other than to ask you to re-read the posts your responding to......

Probably should have worded my statement differently. I meant along the lines that you believe that they had nothing to do directly with the murder and rape of meredith. You believe both participated indirectly. 1 out of fear and the other to help knox. Atleast thats what I have began to understand from you statements.

 

[LondonJohn]

Same with Amanda, my guess is that they thought they could get off completely, in fact, I honestly believe they believed they would in fact be found 'Not Guilty'.

Now a question for you - you've said you believe Amanda to be guilty, just not proven. What do you think her involvement in this murder was? Did she deliver one of the fatal blows, or something more along my line?

That explanation, for me, is unsupportable: it's far too big a risk for Sollecito to even contemplate getting a 20+ year sentence for a murder conviction. I could accept his stance if he was totally oblivious to the murder and its aftermath. But what I think you're suggesting is that he knew about the murder by early the following morning, and - for some reason - helped Knox clean up and stage the crime scene. Firstly, why would he willingly do what you allege he did on the morning of the 2nd, for a girl whom he'd known for less than two weeks? And even if he did willingly help with the clean-up/staging etc., I don't think it would have taken him long to cough up the truth under police interrogation.

Regarding my position, since about a month after I first started reading in detail about this case, it's been as follows: I think there may well have been insufficient evidence to convict Knox and Sollecito of murder. Whether that means that one or both of them were actually involved in the murder, or whether they had no involvement whatsoever, is much harder for me to determine. And in fact, my current thinking is that it's very possible that Guede committed this crime by himself, and that Knox and Sollecito had nothing to do with it. However, I am not nailing my colours to the mast on that. The only thing I am prepared to argue with conviction (no pun intended...) is that it's likely that neither Knox nor Sollecito should have been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of Meredith Kercher, based on the nature and quality of the evidence gathered by the police/prosecutors and presented in court.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

But what I think you're suggesting is that he knew about the murder by early the following morning, and - for some reason - helped Knox clean up and stage the crime scene. Firstly, why would he willingly do what you allege he did on the morning of the 2nd, for a girl whom he'd known for less than two weeks? And even if he did willingly help with the clean-up/staging etc., I don't think it would have taken him long to cough up the truth under police interrogation.

No, he knew about the murder shortly after he returned to the house with Amanda who waited outside like Rudy said, and confronted Rudy still inside. He may not have seen the body just then, but they knew something terrible had happened. And yes he willingly tried to help Amanda cover up her presence there - poor decision on his part, but hey, love will do that you some of us.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Probably should have worded my statement differently. I meant along the lines that you believe that they had nothing to do directly with the murder and rape of meredith. You believe both participated indirectly. 1 out of fear and the other to help knox. Atleast thats what I have began to understand from you statements.

Yes, thats basically it.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

This sounds very professional, and the part I highlighted is tossed off rather casually, as if it is common knowledge. I'm not certain that it is, and wonder what causes you to seem so confident.

"Long toe", known medically as "Morton's toe", historically as "Greek toe", and occasionally as "Celtic toe, is a condition which most of the sources I'm familiar with suggest is shared by about 10% of the population overall (although region variations may be higher.) This doesn't meet the common definition of "usually".

I wonder if you could share your sources on this subject? I ask because I'm one of that 10% (or ... "usually" ) and have had some interest in the subject most of my life. My second toe is nearly 1/2 in. longer than my big toe. My third toe is nearly as long as my big toe.

There are often negative medical repercussions from this condition, occasionally serious and even debilitating ones, which is one reason it has been researched rather diligently by orthopedists for many years. From what I know about the subject your belief about its incidence is rather at odds with theirs. I'm surprised that they haven't noticed.

I guess I'm wrong. It happens that both Amanda and Rudy have second toes longer than their big toes. I do too. And, in an illustration of the human foot that I found on a forensic website, the second toe is shown as the longest:

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/foot_elements.gif

This is the basis of my apparently misinformed understanding.

 

[tsig]

Yeah you believe that knox and sollecito should go to jail. Yet you think they had nothing to do with the murder and rape. Here is a better way to look at this. If one of your own friends was on trial and he said he didn't do it. After reviewing the evidence would you believe him. Would you think that person should be convicted on what was shown.
You ever get a speeding ticket? Cop pulls you over and says sir you was doing 55 in a 40. Can i see your license and insurance. You give him your information. You can then ask to see proof you was speeding. He might or might not show you.
This murder trial is like a speeding ticket. Prosecution says we have evidence. Defense says show us. Prosecution says no.

Every time I've been stopped for speeding the cop was happy to show me the readout.

If it comes to a trial the cop has to show the evidence.

 

[tsig]

So I guess what you're mostly talking about here is the witnesses on the one hand, and Amanda and Raffaele's statements on the other. Addressing the latter, then: which are the statements you find particularly incriminating? The problem for me is that the vast majority of the 'lies' that are normally cited can equally plausibly be put down to normal variations or lapses in memory, of the sort that many of the other witnesses were prone to as well (I posted a list of the inconsistencies and errors in Filomena's testimony a while back, not to attack her - as it was interpreted in some quarters - but to show that by subjecting anyone's words and behaviour to the sort of minute analysis to which Amanda's in particular were subject you can make anyone look suspicious).

And then, of course, there's the false 'confession' from Amanda, which I think falls into a different category from the other alleged 'lies' and needs to be treated separately, because of the particular conditions under which it was given, and because it aligns so closely with all the characteristics of a typical 'coerced-internalized' false confession.

This 'coerced-internalized' false confession' thing paints Amanda as a pretty weak reed. If she's that ready to go along to get along then why wouldn't she participate in the murder for the same reason.

 

[tsig]

That explanation, for me, is unsupportable: it's far too big a risk for Sollecito to even contemplate getting a 20+ year sentence for a murder conviction. I could accept his stance if he was totally oblivious to the murder and its aftermath. But what I think you're suggesting is that he knew about the murder by early the following morning, and - for some reason - helped Knox clean up and stage the crime scene. Firstly, why would he willingly do what you allege he did on the morning of the 2nd, for a girl whom he'd known for less than two weeks? And even if he did willingly help with the clean-up/staging etc., I don't think it would have taken him long to cough up the truth under police interrogation.

Regarding my position, since about a month after I first started reading in detail about this case, it's been as follows: I think there may well have been insufficient evidence to convict Knox and Sollecito of murder. Whether that means that one or both of them were actually involved in the murder, or whether they had no involvement whatsoever, is much harder for me to determine. And in fact, my current thinking is that it's very possible that Guede committed this crime by himself, and that Knox and Sollecito had nothing to do with it. However, I am not nailing my colours to the mast on that. The only thing I am prepared to argue with conviction (no pun intended...) is that it's likely that neither Knox nor Sollecito should have been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of Meredith Kercher, based on the nature and quality of the evidence gathered by the police/prosecutors and presented in court.

Since they were convicted unanimously then maybe your understanding of the nature and the quality of the evidence is faulty.

 

[quadraginta]

delete.

 

[Malkmus]

This 'coerced-internalized' false confession' thing paints Amanda as a pretty weak reed. If she's that ready to go along to get along then why wouldn't she participate in the murder for the same reason.

Hmm, cooperating with police in imagining a scenario in which she was at the cottage and cooperating in murdering her friend/roommate... not the same caliber at all.

 

[Kestrel]

Since they were convicted unanimously then maybe your understanding of the nature and the quality of the evidence is faulty.

Almost all of the proven false convictions in this country were found guilty with a unanimous verdict. Judges and juries are far from perfect in assessing the quality of the evidence.

 

[RoseMontague]

Since they were convicted unanimously then maybe your understanding of the nature and the quality of the evidence is faulty.

I wonder how often there is not a unanimous decision? And how many of these unanimous decisions are reversed on appeal? My bet is the answer to the first question would be very rare and to the second, quite often. Personally, I would prefer to look at the evidence and make my own decision if it is a fair judgment or not. I would not want to base my opinion on unanimousity.

 

[RoseMontague]

This 'coerced-internalized' false confession' thing paints Amanda as a pretty weak reed. If she's that ready to go along to get along then why wouldn't she participate in the murder for the same reason.

I am surprised Massei didn't use this reasoning in the Motivation report. Perhaps it is not perfect after all.

 

[tsig]

I am surprised Massei didn't use this reasoning in the Motivation report. Perhaps it is not perfect after all.

Probably because he didn't use the 'coerced-internalized' false confession' thing.

 

[RoseMontague]

Probably because he didn't use the 'coerced-internalized' false confession' thing.

Exactly, you can use one but not both.