Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Amazer]

Perhaps they have enough insight to feel that this time Mignini is going down for good. The wise thing to do is keep uninvolved and stay as far away from his latest screw-up as possible. When he sinks, sooner or later squadra mobile will come under scrutiny too. Police loyalty or not, they don't want to be part of Titanic's orchestra.

Mignini wasn't even present during the interview where this supposedly happened. How do you propose that it's going to affect him even if it were to emerge from this trial that Amanda was hit?

 

[christianahannah]

As I understand it Patrick's bar Le Chic was not particularly well located within Perugia and was struggling for customers. That was why he invited Meredith to work for one night since she had quite a few friends and she herself would have been an attraction for the business.

On the night that Amanda received the message from Patrick (20:18), it is stated in the motivations (page 322) that the cell tower ping of that message was not compatible with the cell tower of Raffaele's flat. It is suggested Amanda was along the route which would eventually lead one to Le Chic.

− 20:18:12: Amanda receives the SMS sent to her by Patrick Lumumba, which let her off from having to go to work at the ‚Le Chic‛ pub on the evening of 1 November. At the time of reception the phone connected to the cell on Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3, whose signal does not reach Raffaele Sollecito’s house. The young woman was therefore far [i.e. absent] from Corso Garibaldi 30 when the SMS reached her, as she was walking in an area which was shown to be served by the Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 cell. This point of her route could correspond to Via U. Rocchi, to Piazza Cavallotti, to Piazza IV Novembre, bearing in mind that Lumumba’s pub is located in Via Alessi, and that Amanda Knox would have had to travel along the above-mentioned roads and the piazza in order to reach the pub

Amanda was in the immediate neighborhood or back at Raffaele's flat when she replied to the message from Patrick (20:35) and she answered the door when Popovic rang the bell.

Has it been determined at trial where Amanda was and her destination when the message from Patrick was sent and if Amanda was on her way to Le Chic was she to work earlier than her 10 o'clock regular shift that night? Also, would the route bolded in the motivations also be included on the way to Amanda's flat?

 

[stilicho]

I find it baffling that in certain quarters pointing out that you have read the papers in question and that they have not is "arrogance".

I also find it baffling that in the same quarters they call arguments based on having read the peer-reviewed scientific literature "arguing from Google and Youtube".

You will likely always find it baffling that the defence experts--trained professionals--arrived at wildly different conclusions than you did. They didn't use Google, YouTube, or their library cards to arrive at those conclusions.

They were pathologists, the best money could buy, and they still couldn't provide reasonable doubt.

What chance do you think your library card has?

 

[Justinian2]

During her testimony, Amanda's lawyer read from the transcript of the recording of Amanda and her mother on November 17. Unfortunately, we only get served the same snippet (though often with different wording due to the double translation). The most context I've seen is from the Supreme court hearing of 2008-04-01 where it is stated: While talking to your mother in jail you said "This is so stupid, because I can't say anything else. I was there, I can't lie about that, there's no reason I should."

I was there too. If there was a place she couldn't lie about, it would logically have to be here apartment or RS's shack.

The mind readers know for sure. Fiends of the prosecution always know what Amanda was thinking about.

 

[Justinian2]

You will likely always find it baffling that the defence experts--trained professionals--arrived at wildly different conclusions than you did. They didn't use Google, YouTube, or their library cards to arrive at those conclusions.

They were pathologists, the best money could buy, and they still couldn't provide reasonable doubt.

What chance do you think your library card has?

There's that bias again. Nobody is as smart as an Italian trained professional expert!

It could also be the fascist roots of Italy that hold that the government is authority and the people must be disciplined (re: THE DOCTRINE OF FASCISM BENITO MUSSOLINI (1932))

[...] it [government] enforces discipline and uses authority, entering into the soul and ruling with undisputed sway.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

seventeen unanswered comments

You will likely always find it baffling that the defence experts--trained professionals--arrived at wildly different conclusions than you did. They didn't use Google, YouTube, or their library cards to arrive at those conclusions.

They were pathologists, the best money could buy, and they still couldn't provide reasonable doubt.

What chance do you think your library card has?

Stilicho,

Nice to have you back. I have compiled a list of fifteen unanswered questions directed at you in message 6663. I have corrected your reporting on Intron’s estimate of the time of death in message 8193 (9:30, not 9:50), and I am hoping you will acknowledge your error. Do you know what fsa files are and why they are useful? If so, I would welcome your input on message 8444. If not, PM me, and I will provide you with some links.

Why don’t you start a thread in the Science and Technology forum on how long it takes for the stomach to empty its contents?

 

[Withnail1969]

You will likely always find it baffling that the defence experts--trained professionals--arrived at wildly different conclusions than you did. They didn't use Google, YouTube, or their library cards to arrive at those conclusions.

They were pathologists, the best money could buy, and they still couldn't provide reasonable doubt.

What chance do you think your library card has?

The argument from authority again. It's fine to use that where you're from, but nobody's impressed with it here. It seems we have to keep saying that again and again to you people.

 

[RoseMontague]

You will likely always find it baffling that the defence experts--trained professionals--arrived at wildly different conclusions than you did. They didn't use Google, YouTube, or their library cards to arrive at those conclusions.

They were pathologists, the best money could buy, and they still couldn't provide reasonable doubt.

What chance do you think your library card has?

I am not sure what "wildly different conclusions" you are referring to. Do you have some quotes? I have provided previously quotes from 3 judges prior to Massei that all used the stomach contents to better pin down the time of death. The problem they had was getting the starting time of the meal wrong. These other judges were primarily operating on prosecution experts.

 

[Justinian2]

Justinian, please keep "anti-Americanism" out of it. Amanda Knox isn't "America". She is just one person among thousands of people who suffer injustices of this kind all over the world.

Amanda was an arbitrary victim of police injustice just as Meredith was an arbitrary victim of Guede's greed and lust. Had Amanda been the one who came home when he was sitting on the toilet in the cottage, and had Meredith been first on the scene the following morning, then Amanda would be dead and Meredith would be in prison.

In any case, neither Raffaele nor Patrick Lumumba are connected with the US, and both of them suffered the same injustice as Amanda (in Patrick's case, it was only by chance that he was was able to prove his innocence).

Nothing can be gained by bringing national loyalties into the discussion. In any case, it doesn't cut any ice with the many US-based members of the guilter faction.

All good points.

About the anti-Americanism. Remember the attacks of 911 were directed against American targets. It's true that Jihad targeted many other countries as well. Spain, England and others(?) were targeted. I say anti-Americanism because we are a subset of anti-western biases. If A, B, and C are subsets of a larger group D, then it is fair to say that A has the characteristics of group D.

I agree that Amanda could have been killed too. In fact, she may have been the original target.

I know some of the guilters are Americans. It's part of the universal bias in that the majority is characteristically biased against a minority. I'm not just talking about race, that's only one of an infinite number of biases.

When the guilters talk, I look for reasons that they persist with their viewpoint. At the very least, nobody should be positive that Amanda and the 'conspirators' are guilty. That is so beyond comprehension that I cannot trust anyone that certain; he does not listen.

 

[christianahannah]

Do you know what fsa files are and why they are useful?

Chris do you know what the Italian equivalent of fsa files is? Would the terminology be the same (fsa files)? Is this one specific reference data or all compiled data?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

You will likely always find it baffling that the defence experts--trained professionals--arrived at wildly different conclusions than you did. They didn't use Google, YouTube, or their library cards to arrive at those conclusions.

As I believe I have told you before, it's the job of "experts" to keep current with the literature. It's not the job of the literature to conform with whatever comes out of the mouth of some "experts" in Italy. So this is a silly argument on that first level.

On a second level, as RoseMontague points out, the defence experts' opinions do not differ markedly from mine at all. They just had the time of the last meal wrong. So this is a silly argument on that level as well.

Thirdly, I think rather than speaking ill of library cards you might want to consider investing in one. You can find out all sorts of amazing and useful things with a library card. In my view it beats the heck out of living in ignorance.

If it's a good library, you have access directly or indirectly to most of the scientific knowledge in the world - isn't that fantastic? You need a bit of a background in science and the ability to reason to make proper use of it, of course, but if you have that then an library card is a staggeringly powerful thing.

Lastly, I have recently commented on the colossal inanity of confusing arguments based on the peer-reviewed scientific literature with "Google and Youtube". Is it possible that you have completely misunderstood the expectation that you will attack the argument, not the arguer? When we say you should attack the argument, the idea is not that you should call it bad names. The idea is that you present some kind of intelligent rebuttal. If the best you can do is call it "Google and Youtube" you might as well be saying "Your argument's momma is ugly!".

 

[colonelhall]

"There's that bias again. Nobody is as smart as an Italian trained professional expert!"

I take it that you are being sarcastic here. Are you suggesting that the defence experts were sub-standard?

 

[Justinian2]

"There's that bias again. Nobody is as smart as an Italian trained professional expert!"

I take it that you are being sarcastic here. Are you suggesting that the defence experts were sub-standard?

Sometimes they make mistakes.
Sometimes they are biased.
Sometimes they are extorted (by their bosses and others)
Sometimes they are victims of peer pressure & news reports.
Sometimes they are simply incompetent.
Sometimes somebody else contaminates the evidence (deliberately or accidentally)

Look up an American 'expert' nicknamed 'Black Magic'. Are you telling me Italian 'experts' are better than American 'experts'; that people like 'Black Magic' never happen in Italy?

 

[Withnail1969]

I am not sure what "wildly different conclusions" you are referring to. Do you have some quotes? I have provided previously quotes from 3 judges prior to Massei that all used the stomach contents to better pin down the time of death. The problem they had was getting the starting time of the meal wrong. These other judges were primarily operating on prosecution experts.

Wasn't Dr Lalli's estimate of time of death thrown out by Massei because it didn't fit the fable he had concocted?

 

[Chris C]

On the night that Amanda received the message from Patrick (20:18), it is stated in the motivations (page 322) that the cell tower ping of that message was not compatible with the cell tower of Raffaele's flat. It is suggested Amanda was along the route which would eventually lead one to Le Chic.



Amanda was in the immediate neighborhood or back at Raffaele's flat when she replied to the message from Patrick (20:35) and she answered the door when Popovic rang the bell.

Has it been determined at trial where Amanda was and her destination when the message from Patrick was sent and if Amanda was on her way to Le Chic was she to work earlier than her 10 o'clock regular shift that night? Also, would the route bolded in the motivations also be included on the way to Amanda's flat?

Its smoke and mirrors. The fact that she wasn't at Raff's place means nothing. Because Meredith was still alive when Amanda answered the door at Raff's place later that night.

 

[Jungle Jim]

Its smoke and mirrors. The fact that she wasn't at Raff's place means nothing. Because Meredith was still alive when Amanda answered the door at Raff's place later that night.

I find it at least curious that Amanda maintains that she spent the entire night at Raffaele's, yet she apparently did not.

 

[colonelhall]

"Are you telling me Italian 'experts' are better than American 'experts';"

I am not telling you anything. I am asking if you think that Knox's experts were sub standard.

 

[RoseMontague]

Wasn't Dr Lalli's estimate of time of death thrown out by Massei because it didn't fit the fable he had concocted?

Basically yes. The previous judges used the meal time as around 9pm (because Meredith was on her way home and the meal was over by then). They seemed to skip over the testimony of Amy Frost and Sophie Purton that both had the meal at 6pm or possibly earlier or were going by the time the meal was over as the start of the 3 hour window with an hour in either direction. Matteini even said an earlier meal time would lead to an earlier TOD, I believe Katy_did had an expanded translation of this portion posted a few weeks ago.

Guede's lawyers didn't seem to care if it was 9 or 11pm, Guede had already said he was there around 9pm and did not have an alibi, Amanda and Raffaele argued for earlier simply because it would discredit two witnesses and would also put them in alibi range. Massei covers the discussions in detail, but basically goes with the later time implying that the two witnesses deserve more weight than stomach contents determining the time of death and also implying that the stomach contents must not have been tied off properly which is an argument the appeals also argue against.

 

[RoseMontague]

"Are you telling me Italian 'experts' are better than American 'experts';"

I am not telling you anything. I am asking if you think that Knox's experts were sub standard.

The ballistics guy was made to look bad and the defense's forensics experts contradicted each other one believing an attack from the front and the other from the back. One of the DNA defense experts was caught in an oxymoron by Kercher's lawyer.

I believe they could have been better, yes.

 

[Withnail1969]

Massei covers the discussions in detail, but basically goes with the later time implying that the two witnesses deserve more weight than stomach contents determining the time of death and also implying that the stomach contents must not have been tied off properly which is an argument the appeals also argue against.

I understand we know for sure that the stomach contents were tied off correctly due to the autopsy video.