• 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.

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
loverofzion said:
The document ws in English.
She came volunatrily to the Questura with Raffaelo. At first she was questioned as a wintess; at 1:45 AM with her confession she became a suspect.
Click to expand...

The interrogators who couldn't read or write english, typed up a document in English for Knox to sign? How did they know what to type? They didn't record the interrogation.
 
Chris C said:
Sorry, it dont add up. Sex on a train has nothing to do with being a sociopath or murderer. Did the guy she supposedly slept with go out and kill someone? Heck my sister is bi-polar, crazy, addicted to meth, has even tried to stab someone. Are you telling me because she slept with a stranger, thats the real reason she is nuts?
Click to expand...
Again no body said it was "the real reason" for Amanda going on to murder her roommate.
It is simply one indicator of a personality profile that includes an attraction to risk taking and thrill seeking.

I am sorry about your sister; but if you were to add up all the different indications of her craziness, you would then get the whole picture.
As psycholgoists we do this all the time. Take the personal history of the client, and look at each piece of the puzzle in order to come up with a whole psychological profile.

We can't help if we don't understand the inner workings of some supposedly sane people.
 
Chris C said:
The interrogators who couldn't read or write english, typed up a document in English for Knox to sign? How did they know what to type? They didn't record the interrogation.
Click to expand...
There was an interpreter there the whole time.

Don't you read the trial records?
 
loverofzion said:
The document ws in English.
She came volunatrily to the Questura with Raffaelo. At first she was questioned as a wintess; at 1:45 AM with her confession she became a suspect.
Click to expand...

________________

Loverofzion, this is not quite right. Maybe flatly wrong.

On November 6, 2007, at 1:45 AM Amanda signed a statement in Italian, a signed copy to be seen on PMF > "In Their Own Words" > Amanda Knox.

I suppose that the Italian version was translated verbally into English before Amanda signed it. And, at that time, a printed version in English may have been provided, too. (I don't know about that.)

///
 
Last edited:
loverofzion said:
"Actually Mary H once again you are living in your hermetic wishful fantasies."

Edited by LashL: 
Removed quote of moderated content
Click to expand...


Lover of Zion, as a rule, I don't report other posters. There are posters here who do, though, as well as administrators who review this thread daily. I see that you already had this comment removed for rule violation:

"Mary you are sounding like the uneducated unsophisticated woman/man that you are."
Click to expand...
You are skating on thin ice, my friend.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
loverofzion said:
You are twisting my words again.
Women who have sex with strangers on trains are considered risk takers and thrill seekers.
That is just one aspect of AK's personality; there are many many more indicators of her personality that would be required to complete the personality profile of a murderer or a sociopath, both of which she is suspected of being.
Click to expand...

People who actually know her have a much different take on her personality than the anonymous critics who blather about her on the Internet.
 
quadraginta said:
I can't speak to "who knows" what you have around your house. I certainly know what I have around mine, and I have no reason to question that Filomena and Laura knew what they had around theirs. What reasons do you have? Beyond personal experience, that is.

Clearly there are household cleaning products which contain bleach. The leap from this fact to the assertion that the testimony of both Filomena and Laura is somehow flawed or insincere is a rather large one.

You made a point of specifying laundry as some sort of irrefutable example. I pointed out that my own experience was quite the contrary. Now you bring up a 'laundry list' (:)) of other examples of cleaning products, each and every one prefaced with a qualifier which clearly demonstrates your awareness that common alternatives exist. I don't think you are defending your criticism of Filomena and Lauras' statements very well.
Click to expand...

Point taken and well made. My statement that I found it hard to believe was correct only in its subjectivity. I don't think people realize that many common products contain bleach. If those young women scrubbed their shower stall or bathtub they probably used a product containing bleach and may not have even known it.

Interesting you mentioned oxi-clean in your earlier statement. I have looked for a list of many common products that cause a false positive reaction to luminol and ran across a science fair experiment (LOL) that showed oxi-clean reacted with luminol.

http://www.berkshirereb.org/UserFiles/File/transcript science fair 3-10.doc

"I wanted to work with luminol, the material that is used to reveal blood residue under ultraviolet light," she said. "It ended up that the surface the blood is on matters more than the cleaning solution -- hard surfaces such as vinyl flooring and hardwood floors cleaned up easier."
She also found that cleaning solutions such as bleach, Oxiclean and vinegar and water mixtures produce "false positive" results.
Click to expand...

Interesting that a very common product like vinegar also caused a reaction. Christianna, my research also concluded that the best method of cleaning up blood with a non luminol reacting substance= CocaCola (LOL). BTW did you ever buy that luminol testing kit?
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
What relevance does the time that a witness was having dinner far from the scene of the crime have to do with investigation of the crime itself? Was Amanda being questioned as a suspect ON NOVEMBER 2?
Click to expand...

Every relevance, he's a sworn witness. He knows exactly what time he spoke to Raffaele, backed by the telephone records and what was said.
 
Chris C said:
The interrogators who couldn't read or write english, typed up a document in English for Knox to sign? How did they know what to type? They didn't record the interrogation.
Click to expand...

No, the typed up what was passed by the interpretor. They didn't need to speak English. And in any case, how do you know any of them couldn't speak English?
 
halides1 said:
I am not sure which evidence you mean when you talk about certain evidence having been shown to be irrelevant. The electronic data files that the defense repeatedly requested are not irrelevant. If they were, then why do defense teams typically ask for them? They can be used to reanalyze the data, an especially important feature when the DNA is mixed, and therefore open to more than one legitimate interpretation, as Dr. Peter Gill pointed out. They can also be used to look for evidence of contamination or fraud. As Dr. Dan Krane said, the release of the files the international norm.
Click to expand...

They were provided with everything they were legally entitled to under Italian law.
 
Mary_H said:
Actual exchange between Fulcanelli and halides1:




Welcome back, Fulcanelli! :)

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I look at the video of the forensics investigators "finding" the bra clasp, I wonder how there was any DNA left on that sucker to test. After allegedly plucking it from the pile of debris into which it had been swept, the officers touch every surface of it repeatedly, turn it over and over and over in their hands, hand it back and forth to one another in dirty gloves, put it down on the floor, flash camera strobes and shine hot lights on it for long periods of time -- they might as well have stuck a fork in it and roasted it over a campfire. Then they extra-carefully place it in a little plastic bag -- you know, so it won't get contaminated?

Raffaele's DNA is so easy to disturb that he and Amanda managed to clean up every single, last, itty-bitty trace of him from elsewhere in the house. The microscopic speck on the bra clasp, though -- man, that was one tenacious strand of deoxyribonucleic acid!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMaTI0SiuLw
Click to expand...

Hardly, they held it by the edges, were wearing gloves and the clasp was dry. Raffaele's profile was on the hooks which weren't touched at all. DNA cannot be added or removed in those circumstances. But nice hyperbole anyway.

The rest is a straw man. Nobody ever suggested they cleaned up all of Raffaele's DNA.

Since you don't however believe there was a clean-up and if his presence anywhere in the cottage would leave his DNA painted everywhere like emulsion, we can only conclude Raffaele had never stepped foot in the cottage in his life. All those visits in previous days Raffaele made to the cottage? Never happened. Raffaele in the cottage searching it and trying to break down Meredith's door? Never happened. Raffaele showing the postal police around the cottage. Never happened.

Either that, or it's very difficult to actually leave DNA and a lack of it is not unusual.

Which one is it Mary?
 
Last edited:
Mary H said:
This is not an effective argument for Amanda's guilt, nor for her arrest. There is no evidence that Amanda lied or attempted to deceive the police in any way during the period before the interrogations. Therefore, there was nothing in her speech that was inconsistent enough to raise the suspicions of investigating authorities. Any knowledge of inconsistencies came after the arrests.
Click to expand...

It may not be on the planet you live on but it is on planet Earth. I don't see what you think sophistry has to contribute to the debate.

But in any case, Amanda was not arrested for 'lying', she was arrested because she told police she took the murderer to the cottage and was present when Meredith was raped and murdered.
 
Loverofzion said:
It helps put the time into perspective; their alibi was that they wre having dinner at 10 or even later 11;
Click to expand...

The original time they gave was 11 pm. It was also 11 pm that Raffaele claimed to be on his father. 11 pm is, coincidentally, is the time the police had earlier announced they believed Meredith to have been murdered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom