Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

Charlie Wilkes, this is an excelent post!

And watching the writhing evasive responses it caused it hit hard and on target.
There is no question that no matter how you twist and spin it from the legal standpoint (which Mignini skillfully did) the confession bears all the characteristics of a coerced internalized false confession. Most importantly it lacks details regarding the crime apart from those obviously fed by the investigators - the meeting with Lumumba is something only someone who misunderstood Amanda's SMS could come up with.

edit: Even the fact they fed her - meeting Lumumba, which they "knew to be true" at that time were later shown to be false.
Thus Amanda's confession contains only the theory of the crime that ILE believed at the time.

I see similarities in the records of many false confessions. This is a selection of quotes from the Stanford Law Review study that I posted links to yesterday.

Seven exonerees described their involvement as something that came to them in a dream. Rolando Cruz, James Dean, Steven Linscott, Robert Miller, Debra Shelden, David Vasquez and Ron Williamson all gave so-called “dream” statements

Most of these exonerees endured quite lengthy
interrogations. Typically, John Kogut was told “you’re not going anywhere until we get the truth.” Only four were interrogated for less than three hours:
Freddie Peacock, Lafonso Rollins and David Vasquez, all of whom were mentally disabled, and Yusef Salaam, a juvenile whose interrogation was halted by the arrival of a family friend and Assistant U.S. Attorney (unlike those of the other four youths in the Central Park Jogger case, who were interrogated for many hours).The other exonerees were interrogated for far longer, typically involving multiple interrogations over a period of days, or interrogations lasting for more than a day with interruptions only for meals and sleep. Jerry Townsend was interrogated for thirty to forty hours over the course of a week. Just the recorded portions of Robert Miller’s interrogation lasted thirteen to fifteen hours.

Techniques such as the “false evidence ploy,” which have been shown to increase the risk of a false confession, were used in several of these exonerees’ interrogations. For example, in the Robert Miller case, the detective described the interrogation as follows:
Q. You told him you had an eye witness that saw him leaving Mrs. Cutler’s house and had in fact shown pictures—a picture lineup, one of which a picture was Robert, to this witness, and this witness identified Robert’s picture; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was in fact not true.
A. That’s correct.
Q. You were stretching the truth, shall we say, to try to once again elicit information from him; is that right? That was one of your techniques.
A. Well, I don’t know if I could say elicit information. All I could gather—was trying to gather the truth at that point.
. . .
Q. Once again, you were telling him information hoping that he would throw his hands up and say, okay, you’ve got me, I did it. That was pretty much your plan; is that right?
A. Yes.
Other exonerees were told—falsely—that forensic evidence connected them to the crime. David Vasquez confessed after he was told that his fingerprints were found at the scene.

 

[pilot padron]

I never indicated I would not use Nadeau as a source,

Hi and top of morn to you, Rose.

Nor do I recall accusing you or depriving you of such beneficial use of Barbie.

You said this in reply to Fulcanelli (Post# 10321)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Candace Dempsey...The Cook...great source! (Fulcanelli)

I think Candace Dempsey is a great source, as do many others. (Rose)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

My post just inferred from the one liner above that you also shared Mary's opinion of Dempsey as a preferred source. nothing further.

Should you now choose to use it to join my preference for Barbie; glad to have you aboard.

 

[RoseMontague]

Hi and top of morn to you, Rose.

Nor do I recall accusing you or depriving you of such beneficial use of Barbie.

You said this in reply to Fulcanelli (Post# 10321)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Candace Dempsey...The Cook...great source! (Fulcanelli)

I think Candace Dempsey is a great source, as do many others. (Rose)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

My post just inferred from the one liner above that you also shared Mary's opinion of Dempsey as a preferred source. nothing further.

Should you now choose to use it to join my preference for Barbie; glad to have you aboard.

Sadly, even at the point where I was leaning towards guilt I posted a review of Nadeau's book that was less than glowing. However, I did find a few things in the book very interesting and have sourced it on a few occasions. PM me if you are interested and I will point you to it.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Quintevalle was only asked about whether he'd seen Raffaele, not Amanda

Here is the service note written by Volturno on 19 November 2007:

<<Nei giorni precedenti, unitamente al Sovrintendente della Polizia di
Stato, Stefano Gubbiotti, lo scrivente si recava in corso Garibaldi dove
effettuava una serie di accertamenti in ordine all’omicidio KERCHER.
Detti accertamenti venivano esperiti nei vari esercizi commerciali ubicati
lungo il Corso Garibaldi e vie limitrofe. Nel corso dei predetti
accertamenti, venivano esibite le fotografie riproducenti SOLLECITO
Raffaele e KNOX Amanda Marie e veniva contestualmente chiesto ai
negozianti se gli stessi erano stati notati all’interno dei vari esercizi
commerciali. Gli accertamenti esperiti davano esito positivo in quanto
presso il negozio ALIMENTARI QUINTAVALLE SNC ubicato in corso
Garibaldi 6/8, all’insegna CONAD Margherita, i due giovani venivano
riconosciuti sia dal titolare che dalle due commesse. In particolare il
titolare identificato per QUINTAVALLE Marco, nato a Perugia il
22.08.1958, ivi residente in via Bonaventura Valentini 65, tel 075-
5722568, riferiva che il SOLLECITO era suo cliente abituale mentre la
Knox era entrata nel negozio soltanto in un paio di occasioni,
unitamente al fidanzato>> (annotazione 19 novembre 2007).

and google-translated:

<<Previous days, together with the Superintendent of Police
State, Stefano Gubbiotti, the writer went on Corso Garibaldi where
should include a set of an investigation into the killing of Kercher.
These findings were experienced in the various businesses located
along the Corso Garibaldi and the neighboring streets. In the course of these
investigations, photographs were exhibited reproducing SOLLECITO Raffaele and KNOX Amanda Marie, and was asked the same shopkeepers if they had been noticed within the various exercises
trade. The investigations proved unsuccessful as experienced
ALIMENTARI QUINTAVALLE SNC at the store located in the
Garibaldi 6 / 8, characterized CONAD Margherita, the two young men were
recognized both by the owner that the two orders. In particular, the owner identified QUINTAVALLE Marco, born in Perugia
22.08.1958, resident in Via Valentini Bonaventure 65, tel 075 -
5722568, reported that SOLLECITO was his regular customer while Knox had entered the store only a couple of occasions, together with the boyfriend>> (note November 19, 2007).

I think it was translated by katy_did somewhere up this thread, but can't seem to find it right now. But the machine translation should be quite clear to everyone.

 

[Supernaut]

Being trained in martial arts is not the same as being prepared to give an account of yourself when suddenly confronted by an armed attacker. Lots of people learn martial arts for exercise or mental discipline without ever thinking of using them in earnest - I've done so myself. Unless Meredith was a habitual street fighter, I wouldn't expect her to think she had the slightest chance against someone already prepared for violence.

As for Guede being "slight build", from photos (such as on injusticeinperugia), he appears taller than the police officers accompanying him. He wouldn't need to be heavily-built to be extremely intimidating, even without a knife in his hand. I wouldn't take him on.

Exactly.

It's really only the guilters who assert that Meredith would have "fought to the death" because it's a de facto requirement for their little fantasies.

Let's be realistic;

Guede was (is) an athletic male in his prime. He certainly isn't "slight" or "slender" if that's taken to mean skinny and lacking muscle - he is much stronger and faster than 99+% of women. There are very few who could fend someone like him off in a desperate, bare-handed fight for more than a few seconds, notwithstanding "martial arts training" **, and let alone if he were using a knife,

It's likely that Meredith would have been frozen in fear when Guede confronted her, after a single yelp or scream of shock - people (particularly women) should try to imagine how they would react to arriving home after dark and on their own and unexpectedly finding someone like him lurking there, a knife in his hand.

There are certainly people who would instinctively go on to the attack under such circumstances, but not many, and they'd largely be hard-bastard street-fighters and people who make a living in being prepared for unexpected violence, such as seasoned military types and body-guards.

(** Even if Guede did finally provoke Meredith into struggling (or "fighting" if you prefer), it is extremely unrealistic to believe that her martial arts experience would have counted for anything. As practical 'fighting skills' they have to be practised and honed with real dedication, to the point that they become reflexive. Most people who "practice martial arts" are simply dillitantes and hobbyists.)

 

[Withnail1969]

Here is the service note written by Volturno on 19 November 2007:



and google-translated:

<<Previous days, together with the Superintendent of Police
State, Stephen Gubbins, the writer went on Corso Garibaldi where
should include a set of an investigation into the killing Kercher.
These findings were experienced in the various businesses located
along the Corso Garibaldi and the neighboring streets. In the course of these
investigations, photographs were exhibited reproducing SOLLECITO Raffaele and KNOX Amanda Marie, and was asked the same shopkeepers if they had been noticed within the various exercises
trade. The investigations proved unsuccessful as experienced
ALIMENTARI QUINTAVALLE SNC at the store located in the
Garibaldi 6 / 8, characterized CONAD Margherita, the two young men were
recognized both by the owner that the two orders. In particular, the owner identified QUINTAVALLE Marco, born in Perugia
22.08.1958, resident in Via Valentini Bonaventure 65, tel 075 -
5722568, reported that SOLLECITO was his regular customer while Knox had entered the store only a couple of occasions, together with the boyfriend>> (note November 19, 2007).

I think it was translated by katy_did somewhere up this thread, but can't seem to find it right now. But the machine translation should be quite clear to everyone.

Quite clear and indisputably proves that anyone who claims that Quintavalle was only questioned about Sollecito is either ignorant or a liar.

 

[RoseMontague]

It comes from the link you provided. You might have noticed it if you looked at the graph and table on that page.

Neither I, nor you, know what Amanda was wearing that morning.

I will add that neither does Quintavalle know what Amanda was wearing that morning. His testimony as well as his brilliant memory have both been shown to be in error.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I see similarities in the records of many false confessions. This is a selection of quotes from the Stanford Law Review study that I posted links to yesterday.

Thanks RoseMontague
So Amanda's statement is typical for coerced false confessions and the way it was obtained is also typical.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

No I have not aswered because this schematization requires a more complex post. I can say in advance that this would be based a set including the points: 1. no possible alternative substance detected among the houshold chemicals in the apartment and failure by the defence to indicate any;

No soil or rusty water?

2. (logical) analogy, on fundamental unusual features, beteween the bathmat print and the hallway print (isolated not in trail surrounded by clean floor; bare foot; rinsed/diluted quality ot the tracks detected in both cases);

The important difference is that Meredith's DNA was found in the bathmat print, but her DNA was not found in any of the four bare footprints revealed with luminol.

3. visual evidence/measurements indicate prints on the hallway are by more than one person;

Some observers have suggested that it would have been worthwhile to get reference footprints for Meredith and her boyfriend. But I suppose such details are a waste of time and money, once the police have solved the crime and told the media.

4. seize and measurements correspondance between one of the hallway prints and the bathmat print (the same shape and size: weakness of Vinci's explanation);

I would agree that the big toe in the hallway prints looks more like the one on the mat than does the toe in Raffaele's reference print.

5. presence of latent statins enhanced by luminol yielding a mixed Amanda/Meredith's profile in Filomena's room (extremly low probability for such a coincidence);

Indeed. I have to wonder what post-crime activity Amanda engaged in that caused her to deposit her DNA in Filomena's room, but not in the room where the murder took place. Simply being barefoot shouldn't be enough, because they apparently didn't find Filomena's DNA (not that they troubled themselves to get a reference sample from her, but there were no other significant markers in the e-grams). Surely, she would have been barefoot in her own room many times, don't you think?[/QUOTE]

6. presence of an analogue mixed dna profile in one of the hallway latent stains;

Ah, yes - the unsub shoe print. What do you think happened there? How does it contribute to your belief that the bare footprints were made with blood?

7. presence of luminescent substance in addition to the prints and independent from them (this wide positive area has implications in the logical explanation about how the prints were produced);

They got an even greater number of luminol reactions at Raffaele's apartment. Some of them showed his DNA mixed with Amanda's, but neither of them killed the other as evidenced by the fact that both are still alive. Do you think these stains were made with Meredith's blood also?

8. the timings of Amanda's account about her "bahtmat shuffle";

She'd have done better not to mention it, but I don't see how this account supports the view that the luminol footprints were made with blood.

9. position of the hallway prints in the corridoor;

How do you explain their position?

10. analogy between Amanda's luminol footprints in her room and the hallway prints;

How does that show they were made with blood, rather than dirt, or rusty water, or a household cleaner?

11. general properties of alternative chemicals (bleach, natural enzymes, etc) and actual properties of tests.

What properties to you mean?

I appreciate your answer, but your arguments can hardly overcome the negative results of blood and DNA tests. I think you have embraced what you want to believe, even though the forensic evidence is strongly - decisively in fact - against it.

 

[colonelhall]

Withnail: "Some of these people appear to be posting here as a full-time job."
Do you think so? If that is the case, I hope that they are not getting paid well, as they do not appear to be making sense of the point that has been confusing me for sometime.

How come Ms. Knox got herself in this terrible situation? I would have thought that putting herself at the scene of the crime was a terrible move whether guilty or innocent.

The other point that has confused me was the one about the cartwheels. Excuse me, but being an amateur part-timer. I thought that this thread was about the cartwheeling incident. Have we cleared that one up?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mixed DNA at Raffaele's flat

They were having sex at Sollecito's flat. Also IIRC* neither of the mixed samples tested positive for blood.

* I have lost track of the evidence in the case, so I may be wrong.

Odeed,

Is is your assertion that the DNA was necessarily deposited during sex? If so, what are your reasons? If not, then what is your assertion?

 

[RoseMontague]

Withnail: "Some of these people appear to be posting here as a full-time job."
Do you think so? If that is the case, I hope that they are not getting paid well, as they do not appear to be making sense of the point that has been confusing me for sometime.

How come Ms. Knox got herself in this terrible situation? I would have thought that putting herself at the scene of the crime was a terrible move whether guilty or innocent.

The other point that has confused me was the one about the cartwheels. Excuse me, but being an amateur part-timer. I thought that this thread was about the cartwheeling incident. Have we cleared that one up?

Knox made the following mistakes:
1. Not getting a lawyer.
2. Trying to help the police with the investigation.
3. Trusting the police to be honest.
4. Not asking for and/or listening to advice from friends or family.
5. Being different and outside the norm in her reactions and behavior (including the "cart-wheel").
6. Not knowing when to shut up.

 

[colonelhall]

Rose, I think that I can agree with you on most of these points, but why place herself at the scene of the crime?

I think that it is sweet of you to think that she was only trying to be helpful, but nailing Patrick? That was hardly helpful.

It's a mystery!

 

[RoseMontague]

Rose, I think that I can agree with you on most of these points, but why place herself at the scene of the crime?

I think that it is sweet of you to think that she was only trying to be helpful, but nailing Patrick? That was hardly helpful.

It's a mystery!

No mystery at all. Read this study and see if you can find some similarities.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1589123_code492985.pdf?abstractid=1280254&mirid=1

My opinion is that she gave the cops exactly what they were repeatedly asking for, she "buckled" under the constant pressure and they jumped on it. The case was solved.

 

[RoseMontague]

It seems strangely quiet all of a sudden. Since I apparently have the floor to myself at the present time, I would like to talk about the recent questions regarding poster's qualifications to speak about certain subjects, especially the ones asking if they are a doctor when comments are made on the medical evidence.

I happened upon the reverse of this the other day and found it to be pretty amusing.

http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/I'm_a_doctor,_not_a...

 

[odeed]

Odeed,

Is is your assertion that the DNA was necessarily deposited during sex?

Yes, or through intimate contact.

If so, what are your reasons? If not, then what is your assertion?

Because sex is messy, involving saliva, sperm, vaginal secretion, sweat etc.

 

[Katody Matrass]

a bit more about false confessions

There are lots of easy to found info on false confessions:

from "Internalized False Confessions", prof Saul M. Kassin:

THE PROCESS OF INTERNALIZATION
The cases described earlier and others illustrate that there is a predictable, if not scripted, process that gives rise to internalized false confessions. In one form or another, the process contains five components: (1) There is a suspect who is rendered highly vulnerable to manipulation as a function of dispositional characteristics (e.g., young, naïve, mentally retarded, suggestible, or otherwise impaired) and there are more transient factors associated with the crime, custody, and interrogation (e.g., extreme stress, feelings of isolation, sleep deprivation, the influence of drugs). (2) Knowingly or unknowingly, the police confront the suspect with false but allegedly objective and incontrovertible evidence of his or her involvement—evidence in the form of a failed polygraph, an eyewitness, a fingerprint, a shoeprint, or a DNA sample. (3) Often with guidance from police, the suspect reconciles his or her lack of memory with the alleged evidence by presuming that he or she had blacked out, dissociated, repressed, or otherwise failed to recollect the event. (4) The suspect makes a tentative admission of guilt, typically using a language of inference rather than of direct experience (e.g., “I guess I did it,” “I may have done it,” or “I must have done it” rather than “I did it”). and (5) The suspect may convert the simple admission into a fully detailed confession in which confabulations of memory originate from his or her exposure to secondhand sources of information (e.g., leading questions, overheard conversations, crime scene photos, and visits to the crime scene), often facilitated by various imaginational exercises (e.g., “Think hard about how you would have done it.”).

Focusing on how police have persuaded innocent suspects to accept responsibility for a crime they did not commit and cannot recall, Ofshe (1989) identified a number of common interrogation tactics, such as exhibiting strong and unwavering certainty about suspect’s guilt, isolating the suspect from all familiar social contacts and outside sources of information, conducting sessions that are lengthy and emotionally intense, presenting false but allegedly incontrovertible proof of the suspect’s guilt, offering the suspect a ready physical or psychological explanation for why he or she does not remember the crime, and applying implicit and explicit pressure on the suspect, in the form of promises and threats, to comply with the demand for a confession.

some other articles available for free:
The Psychology of False Confessions

Memory Distortions in Coerced False Confessions

Leo, Richard. "Persuaded False Confessions"

Overshadowing Innocence: Evaluating and Challenging The False Confession

 

[Alt+F4]

My opinion is that she gave the cops exactly what they were repeatedly asking for, she "buckled" under the constant pressure and they jumped on it. The case was solved.

If the case was solved at that point why did the police and prosecutors bother interviewing witnesses, obtaining cell phone records, searching for DNA, blood, murder weapons, photographing the scene, etc.?

 

[daydreamer]

DNA Sample Sizes

After reading many of the posts here about DNA on the bra clasp and knife, I wanted to get a feel for just how much material (DNA) was on the items. I have read that the amount of material tested on the bra clasp that was attributed to RS is 1.4 nanograms and the amount attributable to MK on the knife was 10 picograms. So, to get an idea of much that is, I did an internet search on the size of a couple of items with which we are somewhat familiar. It turns out that the average size of a grain of pollen is about 247 nanograms, which is 166 times greater than RS’s material and nearly 25000 times greater than the MK material. I also found out that weight of a normal water droplet in Cyrus cloud is 62 nanograms, which is 44 times greater than RS’s material and nearly 6000 times greater than the MK material. I would venture to say that these sample sizes are beyond the unaided visual capabilities of humans. Considering these sample sizes, I think it would take extreme care to prevent contamination, especially outside the lab environment. Hope this helps folks to get a feel for what the investigators are dealing with.

 

[RoseMontague]

If the case was solved at that point why did the police and prosecutors bother interviewing witnesses, obtaining cell phone records, searching for DNA, blood, murder weapons, photographing the scene, etc.?

Solving the case and "proving" it in court are two different things. BTW, it was Giobbi that used the word "solved" at that point if I remember correctly.