• 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.
Actually you only have indirect informtion from the court and from the defence, and you didn't access the evidence nor the reports, not the pictures, nor the autopsy, nor you heared and questioned the witnesses. Anyway one fact is - whatever you think Massei and the court did wrong - the basis of your information is not the same of the courts'. You have less information. You could theoreticaly have a bettr theory, but you should humbly acknowledge that you do not have a better basis, independently from all what the court could get wrong or make up or from their possible lack of common sense. Even if they were total fools, they still have a better access to the facts of the case.

I quite agree with you that they are total fools. And I agree that they have better access to the facts of the case. In reading Massei's report, however, I did not see any facts favorable to the prosecution that I didn't already know. But I did encounter certain facts favorable to the defense that I didn't know, i.e., the pathologist's report on the digestive evidence.
 
el buscador said:
So, you're saying that Meredith was tortured from 21:00 to 23:30 and that stopped her normal digestion? Really, can you produce any cites from anywhere to validate this assumption?

If you refer to my comments, please read them:

"I reject the assumption that a 23:30 time would be necessary to fit with witnesses and evidence, and this is a capital difference between my way of thinking and your argument"
 
You're wrong.
Variables include medication, state of mind, the contents of the meal itself, posture, if asleep or awake, recent exercise, and the vast number of variations in human enzymes. You're very very wrong.


This is the concept to keep in mind:

..... height and T(lag) time differ either side of the average in a bell curve fashion, such that a small deviation from the mean is very likely, but a large deviation from the mean is virtually impossible. When I see things written such as "well, if the average T(lag) is 82 minutes, then if people say that 150-170 minutes is possible, why not 180 minutes. And if 180 minutes, why not 200 minutes, or 300 minutes, or 400 minutes", I am astonished and saddened. This - to me - shows a complete lack of understanding of basic statistical analysis.

London John, Post 8594
 
If you refer to my comments, please read them:

"I reject the assumption that a 23:30 time would be necessary to fit with witnesses and evidence, and this is a capital difference between my way of thinking and your argument"
OK. What do you think is the time of death?
 
No, I do not.
I contest your entry data. I contest your assmptions from their foundation. I reject the certainity that we can consider that as a normal "moredate size meal"; I reject the clause of "normal circumstances" (also because my theory is based on the assumption that Amanda and Rudy Guede or whoever are already coming at the cottage at the time about when Meredith comes in, and that Meredith is a non norml situation since around 21:00); I reject the absence of alchohol, because there is evidence of the contrary.
So I reject all the first three conditions that you mention as necessary for your conclusion. This implies it is obvious I am not going to take your conclusions.
Moreover, I reject even further asumptions, like the time of the last meal, which you consider as certain and equivalent to 18:00 - 18:30, while I don't. I reject the assumption that a 23:30 time would be necessary to fit with witnesses and evidence, and this is a capital difference between my way of thinking and your argument. Finally, I observe that you do not consider/ do not search in scientifc studies the possible influence on digestion time of further variants, namely: the subsequnt ingestion of other meal entries after some time, the variants due to fibers and kind of meal/food components, the actual advanced status of digestion (so defined in reports) found in Meredith's stomach.

Sighhhhhhhhhh......................

1) We know for sure that the meal was small-to-moderate in size, not only from the recollections of Meredith's English friends who shared the meal with her, but also from the recorded volume of her stomach contents post-mortem: 500ml.

2) We know for sure that between around 6.00pm and 8.45pm, Meredith was in a relaxed, sedentary, "normal circumstances" environment. I think you're suggesting that the pre-amble to the attack began shortly after 9.00pm - but even extreme terror only leads to a slowing of the digestion process, and not its complete cessation. Only the terminal shut-down of the body will shut off the digestion process.

3) Meredith's English friends testified that no alcohol whatsoever was drunk while Meredith was at their house between around 4pm and 8.45pm. Meredith's post-mortem blood alcohol level was therefore either due to her having a glass of wine upon her return home at 9.00pm, or (perhaps more likely) residual from her heavy party the night before. Either way, there was no alcohol in her digestive system for at least the first 2.5 hours after the start of her pizza meal.

4) What time do you think that Meredith's pizza meal started? I've always erred on the side of caution and gone for 6.15-6.30pm. Why do you think the meal started much later than that?

5) The apple pie meal would not have affected the passage of the earlier pizza meal through Meredith's digestive system. This has been discussed and referenced here before. The stomach actually has a linear system of four virtual chambers, through which ingested food passes in sequence on its way through towards the duodenum. The apple crumble pudding would have been treated by the stomach as a totally separate entity from the pizza meal, with its own separate digestion process.

6) Meredith's pizza meal was a very common mixed-ingredient meal, consisting of simple carbohydrate, protein and fat, and containing fibrous vegetable matter, bread matter and cheese matter. We are not talking here about Meredith eating a 32oz steak or an entire chocolate cake.

7) The state of digestion of the food in Meredith's stomach was documented by Dr Lalli. He reported finding recognisable pieces of cheese matter still present, and fibrous vegetable matter. This is entirely inconsistent with food that has been attacked by stomach acids and enzymes for over 4.5 hours, but (just) consistent with food that's been in the stomach for 2-2.5 hours.
 
I think Rose is right. Duodenum still empty 3 hours after the start of the meal is an exception. It is clearly enough to exclude the ToD of 23:30. And while you can argue it is not enough to pinpoint the ToD on its own, it is compatible with and it strengthens the ToD indicated by other evidence, listed above by katy_did.

No, this is not an exception. You are very wrong. Jetlag can have an effect. Symptomless mild gastritis following a night on the tiles....
 
No, this is not an exception. You are very wrong. Jetlag can have an effect. Symptomless mild gastritis following a night on the tiles....

Meredith wasn't jetlagged. Gastritis is essentially defined by its primary symptom (inflammation of the stomach mucosa) and its inevitable secondary symptoms (stomach pain, nausea, loss of appetite). It does not slow down stomach function though. And - although this is obviously less evidential - Meredith is not known to have complained about stomach pains or a lack of appetite.

What else can you think of that might have an effect on stomach emptying times?
 
Pizza full of cheese, crumble full of butter.....


This is the concept to keep in mind:

..... height and T(lag) time differ either side of the average in a bell curve fashion, such that a small deviation from the mean is very likely, but a large deviation from the mean is virtually impossible. When I see things written such as "well, if the average T(lag) is 82 minutes, then if people say that 150-170 minutes is possible, why not 180 minutes. And if 180 minutes, why not 200 minutes, or 300 minutes, or 400 minutes", I am astonished and saddened. This - to me - shows a complete lack of understanding of basic statistical analysis.

London John, Post 8594
 
Last edited:
Capealadin,

From p. 309 of the English translation of the Massei report:

“But the Stardust files remained on Raffaele Sollecito’s computer in a folder shared with the Internet, such that, for these, a ‚last access‛ occurred right on the night of 6-Nov-2007, at 02:47, during the time period in which Raffaele and Amanda were being held in the Questura [Police Headquarters]. The fact that the Encase system registers a "last modified" entry during the night of 6-Nov-2007 for the Stardust files constitutes the confirmation that there has been a loss of data.”

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/410554_knox26.html
Andrea Vogt reported, “Specifically, the computer revealed that the movie "Stardust" had been downloaded, and then a few hours later, at 1 a.m. and 2:47 a.m., someone surfed the Web twice and viewed a story about Kercher's killing on the Italian wire service news agency ANSA.”

She continued, “First, defense lawyers claim that the computer interactions while he was at police headquarters may have canceled out important data showing the last known access to files that could have proven he was on his computer the night of the killing. And second, it further damages the credibility of investigators, who have been under increasing scrutiny since the defense began presenting its case.”

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/09/computer-places-knox-and-sollecito-at.html
Frank reported, “The last access to Stardust is November 6. Raffaele and Amanda were in jail, so the police, while working at the computer, opened Stardust (everyone needs a break).

I have read one report of the interrogation on night of November 5th in which Raffaele gave the police the key to his apartment, saying that they could check his computer if they did not believe him. I recall reading (at a site whose name we do not utter here) a speculation to the effect that perhaps Raffaele Sollecito’s father went over to his house that morning to read up on the murder. Given the younger Mr. Sollecito’s claim that he was not allowed to call his father, and given that I have never heard the police say that they happened to run into the elder Mr. Sollecito at the flat, I can perhaps cautiously advance the opinion that such speculation is unlikely. Moreover, one has to wonder whether the elder Mr. Sollecito had a working computer in his home. If so, it makes the scenario of his coming to the flat even less likely.

My hypothesis is that Mr. Ghirga and Mr. Maori know that they face retaliation from ILE if they speak too directly. My evidence is that Mr. Maori did not name the police, even though the police are the only people whose presence in the flat makes any sense. Given the fact that Mr. Mignini sued Mr. Maori, I do not blame him for being cautious. I would also direct your attention to my two comments upthread concerning reporters who fear retaliation and those who have also been sued by Mr. Mignini. My hypothesis could be falsified if a reporter spoke with them as anonymous sources and they still failed to mention various problems and irregularities in this trial. These include but are not limited to failure to turn over forensic files, failure to obtain a change in venue, failure to test the pillowcase stain, harming the hard drives, holding Mr. Sollecito for almost a year prior to a formal charge without sufficient cause, and so forth. I would also remind you that Ms. Bongiorno criticized the prosecution for its failure to turn over forensic data in the summer of 2009, specifically citing the right to a fair trial.

Moby Dick and slithy references to Alice in Wonderland are fine, but let us give Churchill his due.

I'm not going to deal with hypothesis, can't remember who, no evidence submitted. I was not given reliable cites, (which is deemed so important). In fact the silence is rather deafening. I wrote about Ghirga's staement. I asked for evidence that Ms. Popovic had credentials pertaining to the fact that she found Amanda normal. I asked how long she'd known Amanda, if she had ACTUALLY seen her. I asked who had access to Raff's apartment, some evidence that it was the police. Who were they? I don't follow your reasoning at all, that the prosecutor or attorneys are *nervous* of the police. Attorneys and prosecurors cross examing police all the time. I asked for evidence where Ghirga was in jeapordy, should he say something bad about the trial. In fact, he didn't have to say anything. Yet, he did. So, reliable cites are asked (DEMANDED) for the *guilters)*...but the innocenters can go about, with hypothesis, don't know names..etc. I am disappointed, Halides, that you have tried to take me around THE MULBERRY BUSH, ignoring the nitty gritty of what I asked for. Do you think I'm so easily bamboozled? This wondering off in circles, rather than staying on point?

Thank you Mary, for the tip on using quotes. That's very useful for everyone. I came here in good faith, have been insulted by Chris C, not afforded the same standard as the innocenters. It's obvious that posters like me are not welcome. And not afforded cites, on point answers, which is claimed to be necessary to debate. Whatever the outcome, may none of us know the tragedy of the Kerchers. Cheers.
 
Machiavelli said:
It has already been proved that your belief on in "information leaked in order to shape puiblic opinion" is false. I showed how your ideas for example on HIV test had no basis in reality.

But that is just one of many examples. I have written a summary of this case, and here is an excerpt:

The authorities made good use of every opportunity to discredit Amanda in the eyes of the media and the public. One such opportunity involved a Harry Potter book. In describing her activities on the evening of the murder, Amanda told police she spent some time reading a Harry Potter book in German at Raffaele’s apartment. She explained that reading the translated editions of familiar books was a technique she used to improve her language skills.

On December 18, 2007, investigators went to the cottage to search for more evidence. They were desperate to come up with something that would support their claim that Amanda and Raffaele were involved in the murder. Among the items they found were a Harry Potter book in German. They triumphantly presented it to the media as proof that Amanda had been lying, because the book she claimed to have been reading at Raffaele’s apartment was found instead at the cottage where Meredith was murdered. The media responded exactly as the authorities might have hoped. In the US, NBC’s Live with Dan Abrams reported the story on December 19. Following are excerpts from the program transcript.

ABRAMS: More bad news for American college student Amanda Knox suspected of being involved in her roommate‘s murder in Italy. Now, new indications that investigators are finding more discrepancies in Amanda‘s story. She told the chief investigating judge that she was reading a Harry Potter book at her boyfriend‘s house the night of the murder. But alas, authorities have now found the book, not at her boyfriend‘s apartment, but at the cottage where she was living, but also where the crime took place.​

The program continues with Italian reporter Andrea Visconti and US legal analyst Pam Bondi:

VISCONTI: Bad news. Not only did they find the book, they found the book in German. How many people in Italy read Harry Potter in German? Now, Amanda apparently reads German. So she did say that she was reading the book in German and that very copy ended up in Meredith‘s apartment.​
ABRAMS: And she said, “I was reading it at my boyfriend‘s house,” which has been her alibi up to now, right?​

VISCONTI: She did. Exactly. So this is another lie or contradiction or whatever, so her situation is getting really difficult.
At this point, Bondi steps in to offer her analysis:

BONDI: What they‘re doing, Dan, this is really about the credibility of her story. And Italian investigators are doing a great job. They‘re slowly chipping away at her story. They went back in the house just yesterday and that‘s how they found the book.​

The crucial fact that the authorities neglected to mention was that Amanda did, in fact, own the German editions of two Harry Potter books. She bought them in Germany the previous summer. One was at the cottage, and the other was at Raffaele’s apartment. The police knew this. A German Harry Potter book is shown clearly on video they took at Raffaele’s apartment, more than a month before they found the other book in Amanda’s room.

Thanks, Charlie Wilkes. It's nice to remember what the Knox family had to deal with, when discussing their PR firm hiring.
 
(msg #8948, p224)
For example, Robin and Sophie rendered three accounts each to the police in the previous days of investigation, containing variations on timings, corrections and caveats on their memories.

Robin and Sophie both changed their stories? More than once??? Crime solved! Changed story = proof of guilt! ;)
 
Hi Mary

I beg to respectfully differ about the cause of posts being ignored, as well as the helpfulness of 'marmalade' sized verbiage

1) I am starting to get "flak' and expect more, so your conclusion there simply no longer has legs


Is this the flak you are referring to?

You: In the meantime, would it be presumptuous and overly self confident if I interpret your marked and unusual lack of response to my previous "lengthy" posts on the topic (heavily salted with unmistakable references to your post) as reluctant silent assent to and begrudging agreeement with same

London John: Yes, unfortunately it would. My apologies.


If so, I'm not sure it can be called flak, if you solicited it by asking the question.

Not every post is responded to. Some posts just have more to hang one's hat on than others. I reread the post in question and it didn't raise any red flags with me.

2) Matthew Best returned shortly after the marmalade analogy, which was directed to him, with his side of the story,
After that exchange I now consider us perhaps not yet beer drinking' buddies, but definitely not antagonists flaming each other behind the iron curtain of cyberspace, so that one too carries no weight; it was *very* helpful


Matthew Best is a nice person.

A respectful request:
I am just a little uncomfortable with your folksy terminology calling me "dear" until you resolve the real question of your gender that you were so very witty about somewhere else in cyberspace:);)


My apologies for being forward. Yes, I am of the female persuasion. But it's okay for men to call each other "dear," too.:)
 
(msg #8952, p224)
Assuming jail terms are only handed down in cases of "calunnia" against state authority or representitives, then it is indeed something straight out of the middle-ages, and ripe for abuse at any time by individuals like Miginini and Commodi.

"Slandering the state" was a favourite charge of Stalinist regimes against dissidents.
 
Meredith wasn't jetlagged. Gastritis is essentially defined by its primary symptom (inflammation of the stomach mucosa) and its inevitable secondary symptoms (stomach pain, nausea, loss of appetite). It does not slow down stomach function though. And - although this is obviously less evidential - Meredith is not known to have complained about stomach pains or a lack of appetite.

What else can you think of that might have an effect on stomach emptying times?
.

The point is that there are too many variables including those that would be unknown. That is why it is not regarded as reliable. One would not be able to discover a predictable curve, similar to you not being able to squash your desired meanings into Meredith's PM results.
 
discovery did not happen

I take from it, that he is a gentleman, and that he takes pride in his profession, and that he respects the Court system, in his country.

capealadin,

Do you deny that the prosecution withheld the electronic data files containing forensic DNA evidence from the defense. I have documented this point in multiple ways, so you might want to check the thread before answering.

Assuming that you do not deny it, do you claim that the trial was fair, and if so why?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom