• 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.
LondonJohn said:
The versions of ELISA and Western Blot test that were used in 2007 in the USA and Europe had minimised the chances of false positives due to the presence of antigens associated with other immume-system-related viruses. The false positive rate for HIV was (and is) extremely low if you're not a member of a high-risk group.

But, as you say, given all the other strange factors surrounding this rather sad and unpleasant area of the case, it's probably moot anyhow.
Click to expand...


Yes, I felt when the subject was brought up, it was more to point out that Amanda had a cold sore than to add anything valuable to the discussion.

I notice that elsewhere on the internet, this discussion is being characterized as being about whether Amanda's rights were violated simply by having had an HIV test administered. While Amanda's rights would have been (and may have been) violated if she were tested without her express consent, the theme of this discussion has been about whether her rights were violated when her diary was released to the media, not about the administration of the test itself. Sigh.
 
Machiavelli,

You moved the goalposts with respect to what Amanda said about Meredith, but the fact remains that Amanda did express empathy for Meredith (I am no expert, but isn't that exactly what sociopaths cannot do?). Here is the other excerpt from her diary that I mentioned. I have found a slightly different version in Murder in Italy, page 185, which I quoted in comment 3987 on page 100 of this thread.
Click to expand...

Believe me, her diaries are not beautiful. The concept of narcissism is a bit complex, it is in fact one of the most complex arguments in psychology. I am the main author of the Italian Wikipedia pages on the topic. But it is not our interest to define Amanda's personality. If you feel satisfied with Amanda's empathy towards Meredith expressed in her diary, it's your feelings so good for you. I think most Italians won't like it from the human side, I never met somebody who does.
My only point on the human topic is this: everybody here was talking about amanda's lists of lovers and sex life as a source of negative publicity, but the sheer names of her lovers is something totally irrelevant on the human side, a negative publicity to her personality insted comes from the rest of her diary. If you want to argue with me because I think she didn't express pain for Meredith's death, it's up to your choice, but if you think the average public appreciates the empathic attitude expressed by Amanda towards Meredith in her diary or her personality in general, I'm afraid you are wrong.
 
Although I can't be sure, it may be that someone heard that most people with HIV have HSV-1, and got it muddled in their heads so that they thought that most people with HSV-1 had HIV. That would explain this meme.
Click to expand...

Herpes Simplex immunitary response is an important cause of false positives in HIV test.
 
Danceme said:
That's pretty crazy, sounds like someone trying to cash in by using her name.



Wow Supernaut, you sound so flabbergasted at what I said you must have really ***t your pants then when Chris C wrote this whopper,

"1 judge in your family? I come from a monster sized family. 17 aunts and uncles. I have one Judge and one PD amongst my Uncles and atleast 2 lawyers amongst my 60+ first cousins."

But hey, you must have missed that one.



:rolleyes: I feel completely shot down now, wow just wow Justinian :eye-poppi
Click to expand...

T'would appear you just don't get irony/sarcasm, so I'll spell it out for you - you were having the mickey taken.

And my dad's bigger and cleverer than your dad anyway.
 
Kevin_Lowen said:
On the contrary, unless you resolve this problem you have no sound intellectual basis for thinking it's even remotely possible that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty.
Click to expand...

You think so, and that is a point of my radical disagreement.

Things for me are set in an order: the certain evidence comes first. Once I realize there is evidence collected of implication in the crime, given that this evidence is certain, any scenario that fits with this evidence is theoretically acceptable, and there is no dependance on a single scenario in particular.
Moreover, to me the problem of ToD is solved or non-existent. First, a hour shift of the ToD has no implication on the evidence, because Amanda and Raffaele don't have an alibi at any time, surely not after 20:40. Second, the assertion that a ToD at 22:00 is unlikely has simpy insufficient basis.
 
Mary_H said:
You still haven't addressed whether Amanda knew her diary was not secret. This knowledge might make all the difference in the world about what she wrote in it. If she did not know her diary was going into the evidence file, or was subject to seizure, then statements like these are not valid:

"No, she leaked it herself, by writing it in her prison diary. Anything a person in cautional custody does or keeps in their cell is not private."

"Who is the person who "allows"? There is only one person who wrote of this story, Amanda on her diary. Then, Fiorenza Sarzanini accessed the investigation file and published her diary."

"Something produced by her under her own control, while she even had the status of a public person, a writing just expressing image of her including details of her choice."

If the police are allowed to seize a prisoner's writings without her permission, then what is to stop them from taking her bedding without her permission, or even from raping her? There must be some regulations. Amanda's testimony suggests she was not aware of the regulations about written material, hence, she is not responsible for making the information about her HIV test public.

The kind of thinking that holds that Amanda is responsible for her diary being released is the same kind of thinking that holds she is responsible for Patrick's unconventional arrest, and her mother was responsible for Patrick's prolonged stay in jail. Yesterday on Perugia Shock, someone even blamed Raffaele for his sister's dismissal from the police force.

Why are the defendants responsible for so much and the authorities responsible for so little?
Click to expand...
Police seizing writings from a prisoner on trial for assault and murer is hardly the same as police raping said suspect.
Your rantsing are really baseless.

And yes, incidentally, amanda was wholly responsible for landing Patrick in jail, and yes, her mother played a significant part in his remianing there for the two weeks. She- Edda-knew he was innocent and yet didn't tell the authorities (excuse:"I didn't speak good Italian"!)
These slippery associations of yours- equating sezing the accused's diaries with police rape- serve no use to anyone with a rational questioning mind.

And anyone thinking clearly would know that her diaries are up for further evidence as are phone calls, conversations etc.
 
halides1 said:
I spoke with several physicians about the HIV testing incident. One who was familiar with Italy’s medical system pointed out that there were likely to be differences between the United States and Italy. However, the consensus was that it would be quite unusual to inform a patient about a positive ELISA test and that if this were done, the patient would be counseled about it and told that there was a chance that it was a false positive. The reason that the results of the ELISA are generally not disclosed is that it only takes about a week or two to obtain the follow-up results. No one at this board or any other has documented (as opposed to asserted without proof) that Amanda was counseled.

Moreover, to allow this information to become public is unconscionable. Three reporters, John Hooper, Jonathan Martin, and Barbie Nadeau describe this information as a “leak” and one indicates that the leak came from an investigator. ILE apparently avoided being prosecuted, but I still think that ILE has some explaining to do.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised this has been down-played so much.

Words can't express what I personally feel about it - it is a repulsive, cruel and downright EVIL thing to inflict on anyone.
 
Machiavelli said:
This is precisely what was done, as Amanda herself says. Nobody told her she was "HIV-positive" as far as what she reports. She was told that she had to do a second kind of test because the first was positive.
Click to expand...



“They told me it was positive and they said I had AIDS. I was left shocked. I didn’t know how that could be possible.”

“They told me to think about it hard and so I wrote in my diary about all the partners I had had.”

“I was really worried. Mamma mia I was crying, I thought I was going to die and not be able to have any children.”

“They took the test three times over two weeks and I was under so much pressure because I thought I had AIDS.”​

You were saying?
 
Machiavelli said:
Believe me, her diaries are not beautiful. The concept of narcissism is a bit complex, it is in fact one of the most complex arguments in psychology. I am the main author of the Italian Wikipedia pages on the topic. But it is not our interest to define Amanda's personality. If you feel satisfied with Amanda's empathy towards Meredith expressed in her diary, it's your feelings so good for you. I think most Italians won't like it from the human side, I never met somebody who does.
My only point on the human topic is this: everybody here was talking about amanda's lists of lovers and sex life as a source of negative publicity, but the sheer names of her lovers is something totally irrelevant on the human side, a negative publicity to her personality insted comes from the rest of her diary. If you want to argue with me because I think she didn't express pain for Meredith's death, it's up to your choice, but if you think the average public appreciates the empathic attitude expressed by Amanda towards Meredith in her diary or her personality in general, I'm afraid you are wrong.
Click to expand...
I WOULD AGREE.

Amanda's utterances in regard to Meredith were psychopathic in nature, e.g. "She *********** bled to death" to Meredith's friend who was expressing her wish that Meredith hadn't suffer; "bleagh" when confronted with the gory details; her "I only knew her for under 2 months and am trying to get on in with my life", as well as her actions after the discovery of the body (shopping for one pair of lingerie while laughing about having hot sex with Raffaelo), not attending Meredith's vigil, instead opting to have a nice pizza meal.

Anyone with any traianing in human behavior would see very quickly that she possessed psychopathic chracteristics; she lacked empathy and had an overblown sense of her own importance, all hallmarks of a narcissistic personality.

This is what is irking the posters like yourself; her personality is revealed through the details of her own making.
 
LondonJohn said:
A propos of nothing.......

Knox and Sollecito were NOT "cokeheads". They were not regular cocaine users, let alone addicts. There is apparently some evidence that Sollecito used cocaine once, but no more than that. There is no evidence that Knox ever used cocaine. No evidence of cocaine use was presented in the trial, and no evidence of cocaine use was found by the police or prosecutors during the investigation.

Anyone who says otherwise is either dissembling to suit an agenda, or is somehow honestly mistaken (although I'll go with the former explanation in this respect...).
Click to expand...
There is evidence that Raffaello was an avid user of hard drugs before meeting Amanda; there is a strong suggestion that the two were on something a lot harder thatn marijuana that night, very possibly coke.
But we will likely never know the truth.
 
You were saying?
Click to expand...

I was saying exactly what I said.
She said (in court) that the doctor told her they would do another test because the first could be a false positive.
If I tell you you have to do a second test, this implies the first test is no definitive response. Either one or the other.
 
Machiavelli said:
I was saying exactly what I said.
She said (in court) that the doctor told her they would do another test because the first could be a false positive.
If I tell you you have to do a second test, this implies the first test is no definitive response. Either one or the other.
Click to expand...

And the press took photo's of the diary while it was in the prosecutions custody how?
 
no evidence

loverofzion said:
There is evidence that Raffaello was an avid user of hard drugs before meeting Amanda; there is a strong suggestion that the two were on something a lot harder thatn marijuana that night, very possibly coke.
But we will likely never know the truth.
Click to expand...

If there were evidence that they were using drugs (other than smoking cannabis), the prosecution would have brought it up at the trial. If you had evidence that Raffaele was a habitual user of drugs, you would have shown in. Therefore, both statements are false.

Because you have not responded to my remarks or Mary's remarks, I conclude that you conceded that you were wrong on all of those points. Great, now we can move on.
 
Anyone with any traianing in human behavior would see very quickly that she possessed psychopathic chracteristics; she lacked empathy and had an overblown sense of her own importance, all hallmarks of a narcissistic personality.
Click to expand...

Psychopathic is a bit an extreme definition, however it is obvious she had at least a narcissistic personality style, a lack of empathy which proved to be disfunctional in the particlar context.
I can also observe her rare mentions of Meredith are generally expressing a relation to Amanda's disgraceful story and problems. But Amanda's personality type is still an irrelevant datum in comparison to her being a liar.
 
And the press took photo's of the diary while it was in the prosecutions custody how?
Click to expand...

The diary ws not in the prosecutions custody. The diary was photocopied and seven copies included in seven different files.
 
LondonJohn said:
Even short code calls or a redial of previous calls would take at least a two-key operation to perform.
Click to expand...


The call to voice mail could require only a long press on number 1. A call to abby would require at least 2 key presses plus the send (unless she had activated voice dialing in which case it could take zero key presses).
 
Machiavelli said:
The diary ws not in the prosecutions custody. The diary was photocopied and seven copies included in seven different files.
Click to expand...


Who took the diary out of Amanda's cell? What did they want with the diary? Were they going to have a Graphologist analyze Amanda's handwriting? Were they planning to use Statement Analysis to peak into Amanda's psyche?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom