Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Dan O.]

Everybody except treehorn accepts that Amanda was given a ticket for a loud party and paid the fine. treehorn alone is trying to make a claim that this was somehow a bigger deal. treehorn's repeated claim that the COURT found her guilty is trying to create the impression that there was a trial in front of a judge. If treehorn's claims were made the first time the issue was brought up they would be factually correct. But to repeatedly make the same claims AFTER the facts have been discussed leads me to believe that treehorn is promoting a lie. treehorn's credibility is therefore trashed in my opinion.

 

[Machiavelli]

After parsing your elegant prose, I realize you are making a simple but important point: measurements taken from photos of stained fabric are subject to error. Therefore, Rinaldi is a buffoon of the first order, and Massei is a fool for taking him seriously. I could not agree more. Thank you for saying it so well.

But I also meant to say that a centimetre grid overlapped to the stain would produce a good array of references.
If you have several metric references on different sides of the picture, you can assess photo image deformation.
I don't think Rinaldi is a buffoon - he isn't, by the way he was a student of physics at the Bologna University at the time when I was too - I think he could take measurements of the physical objects while we can't. Our extrapolation of a scale is an ex post work resembling a kind of reverse engeneering, but in a context of poor data set.
On what concerns fabric deformation, the significance of this has to be taken into account and assessed. For example, if you think the stain has shrunk, but the stain is still to big to match you sample, this means the deformation is not affecting the result.

 

[Withnail1969]

Everybody except treehorn accepts that Amanda was given a ticket for a loud party and paid the fine. treehorn alone is trying to make a claim that this was somehow a bigger deal. treehorn's repeated claim that the COURT found her guilty is trying to create the impression that there was a trial in front of a judge. If treehorn's claims were made the first time the issue was brought up they would be factually correct. But to repeatedly make the same claims AFTER the facts have been discussed leads me to believe that treehorn is promoting a lie. treehorn's credibility is therefore trashed in my opinion.

Indeed. I believe a zealous lawyer acting for the Knox family could find much to work with in treehorn's posts. Internet anonymity doesn't last long when the lawsuits start. That's just my opinion, of course.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

Withnail1969 and RoseMontague:

Just a quick THANK YOU to you both for clearing that up (about the bra clasp). I thought I was imagining things after reading the report - considering the TELEGRAPH is supposed to be one of the 'better' Newspapers here in the UK, I think that the report is a further indictment of the shoddy media reporting at the time.

I am not sure now why I was so surprised!

 

[RoseMontague]

But I also meant to say that a centimetre grid overlapped to the stain would produce a good array of references.
If you have several metric references on different sides of the picture, you can assess photo image deformation.
I don't think Rinaldi is a buffoon - he isn't, by the way he was a student of physics at the Bologna University at the time when I was too - I think he could take measurements of the physical objects while we can't. Our extrapolation of a scale is an ex post work resembling a kind of reverse engeneering, but in a context of poor data set.
On what concerns fabric deformation, the significance of this has to be taken into account and assessed. For example, if you think the stain has shrunk, but the stain is still to big to match you sample, this means the deformation is not affecting the result.

I don't want anyone, including yourself as well as those on the innocent side of things to take this the wrong way, but I have seen enough outlines from both sides now. Maybe you can all just take the outline of the bathmat print, color it in, and label it Rudy or Raffaele. Just seeing the wide variety of results here is answer enough for me and that answer is that the print is not conclusive for either one of them.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity/504473/first-pics-hayden-panettiere-as-amanda-knox.html

Still not convinced that this is the right time for a film to be commenced but it will be interesting to see how this particular portrayal develops, as the makers have been at pains to point out that the 'ending' will be left as a 'question mark'.

 

[Justinian2]

Excellent point. However, that list just focuses on the anti-social behavior. Amanda exhibited plenty of evidence of positively social behavior.

Justinian's maxims of the law were (paraphrased):

1) Cause no harm
2) Give each man his due.

Those are social characteristics and appear, in one way or another, in all religions. I think Amanda had many more social than anti social characteristics. However, I worry about the people prosecuting Amanda as well as the enablers of that prosecution. If Amanda is innocent, then they are guilty. Justice requires rapid and total restitution for all the losses inflicted on the AK and RS families. However, no more injustice would be OK by me at this stage.

 

[LiamG.]

Love the way you frame that.

I feel silly spelling it out for you:

Hosting a party is not "antisocial" vis-à-vis your, shall we say, 'like-minded' guests.

Hosting a party in a manner that "frightens"/ "disturbs"/ violates the civil and property rights of your neighbors to the point where they have to call the police is, without doubt, "antisocial."

PS A lack of respect for the rights of others (and "boundaries") is a characteristic of sociopathy.

This episode, though indicative, is quite harmless, if you comapre that to her behaviour after MK`s murder. Regardless of what you think of her innocence or guilt, making fun of the victim ("she f****** bled to death", "sh** happens) and laughing besides MK`s mourning friends, turning cartwheels in the police station and thinking about writing a song about the murder leads you inevitably to the conclusion, that this person either:

-hated the victim to her bones
or
-showed ample evidence of a sociopathic behaviour
or
-was about to lose it, because she committed a non-premeditated murder
or
-any combination of these three things

As committing such a brutal crime, be it premeditated or not, is obviously sufficient ("thank you" Kevin Lowe for your "lesson" on necessity and sufficiency) for being a sociopath, it comes down to, she

-hated the victim to her bones
and/or
-she she showed ample evidence of being a sociopath

Personally I tend to rule out possibility 1 as everything I`ver read so far gave me the impression, that their relationship was in fact not that good but definetly not driven by hatred, too.

But, why the hell am I exerting myself to write this, I`m sure, there wil be a superficial four liner response post:
"AK didn`t hate MK, there were photos from both of them on AK`s laptop. Moreover AK ended an sms to MK with an "X", which means giving someone a kiss. So, in fact they were good friends.
And AK is a totally normal college girl. Everyone reacts different to traumatic events; her behaviour was nothing out of the normal."

 

[Scorpion NITE]

Must be great to ask questions and then answer them yourself. As for 4 lines, I'm not sure they are warranted.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

there's no mole like an old mole

(Why not just admit that Knox's behavior is 'consistent with' the notion that she was beginning to show the signs and symptoms of a personality disorder? The Seattle conviction, sex with (at least) 3 strangers in 6 weeks and the abuse of street drugs to the point of memory loss, certainly don't militate in favor of ruling it out.)

Treehorn,

Amanda had two intimate partners her whole time in Italy, Daniel (DeLuna?) and Raffaele Sollecito. They are not strangers and there were no others. She smoked cannabis. "Street drugs" is a potentially misleading term, and she is not claiming memory loss. Your claims seem to date from 2008 and generally were refuted by 2009.

Any further thoughts on sthort stories or manga, now that you have read my comments on these issues?

 

[Justinian2]

This episode, though indicative, is quite harmless, if you comapre that to her behaviour after MK`s murder. Regardless of what you think of her innocence or guilt, making fun of the victim ("she f****** bled to death", "sh** happens) and laughing besides MK`s mourning friends, turning cartwheels in the police station and thinking about writing a song about the murder leads

inevitably to the conclusion, that this person either:

-hated the victim to her bones
or
-showed ample evidence of a sociopathic behaviour
or
-was about to lose it, because she committed a non-premeditated murder
or
-any combination of these three things

As committing such a brutal crime, be it premeditated or not, is obviously sufficient ("thank you" Kevin Lowe for your "lesson" on necessity and sufficiency) for being a sociopath, it comes down to, she

-hated the victim to her bones
and/or
-she she showed ample evidence of being a sociopath

Personally I tend to rule out possibility 1 as everything I`ver read so far gave me the impression, that their relationship was in fact not that good but definetly not driven by hatred, too.

But, why the hell am I exerting myself to write this, I`m sure, there wil be a superficial four liner response post:
"AK didn`t hate MK, there were photos from both of them on AK`s laptop. Moreover AK ended an sms to MK with an "X", which means giving someone a kiss. So, in fact they were good friends.
And AK is a totally normal college girl. Everyone reacts different to traumatic events; her behaviour was nothing out of the normal."

The police love to indulge in black humor because it eases the emotional pain. Perhaps we can accord Amanda some of the rights we accord our public servants.

Furthermore, cartwheels are a great way to restore circulation - especially if feeling light-headed.

We can all agree that this crime was sufficient to allow us to brand the murderer as a sociopath. What some of us don't believe is that the sociopath was Guede alone.

That's a five line reply.

 

[treehorn]

If treehorn's claims were made the first time the issue was brought up they would be factually correct. But to repeatedly make the same claims AFTER the facts have been discussed leads me to believe that treehorn is promoting a lie. treehorn's credibility is therefore trashed in my opinion.

Whoa!

There was a discussion that resolved the matter?

I'm playing catch up here - where was it? Can you point me in the right direction?

FYI, I'm not trying to "promote" anything, much less a "lie."

That's a pretty strong accusation. It's also completely unwarranted:

You can check it out yourself: http://web1.seattle.gov/courts/cpi/

Fact is, there IS a Seattle Municipal Court record in respect of Knox's police-issued citation for "Residential Disturbance" - the record indicates that the Court found the offense in question had been committed by Knox.

In my (common law) jurisdiction, we call that a "conviction."

Who cares?

Anyone that is at all interested in examining the veracity of the claims that Knox had NO history of unlawful conduct/ brushes with the law, and showed NO signs of mental illness/ sociopathy.

 

[Withnail1969]

Treehorn,

Amanda had two intimate partners her whole time in Italy, Daniel (DeLuna?) and Raffaele Sollecito. They are not strangers and there were no others. She smoked cannabis. "Street drugs" is a potentially misleading term, and she is not claiming memory loss. Your claims seem to date from 2008 and generally were refuted by 2009.

Any further thoughts on sthort stories or manga, now that you have read my comments on these issues?

It's 7:33 am in Seattle, so I think treehorn is probably either eating breakfast or en route to his job as an attorney. He has some records to look up at the courthouse regarding Amanda Knox's conviction for a criminal offence. I hope he's had enough sleep though, because he was up very late.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not the cartwheel again

This episode, though indicative, is quite harmless, if you comapre that to her behaviour after MK`s murder. Regardless of what you think of her innocence or guilt, making fun of the victim ("she f****** bled to death", "sh** happens) and laughing besides MK`s mourning friends, turning cartwheels in the police station and thinking about writing a song about the murder leads you inevitably to the conclusion, that this person either:

-hated the victim to her bones
or
-showed ample evidence of a sociopathic behaviour
or
-was about to lose it, because she committed a non-premeditated murder
or
-any combination of these three things

As committing such a brutal crime, be it premeditated or not, is obviously sufficient ("thank you" Kevin Lowe for your "lesson" on necessity and sufficiency) for being a sociopath, it comes down to, she

-hated the victim to her bones
and/or
-she she showed ample evidence of being a sociopath

Personally I tend to rule out possibility 1 as everything I`ver read so far gave me the impression, that their relationship was in fact not that good but definetly not driven by hatred, too.

But, why the hell am I exerting myself to write this, I`m sure, there wil be a superficial four liner response post:
"AK didn`t hate MK, there were photos from both of them on AK`s laptop. Moreover AK ended an sms to MK with an "X", which means giving someone a kiss. So, in fact they were good friends.
And AK is a totally normal college girl. Everyone reacts different to traumatic events; her behaviour was nothing out of the normal."

LiamG,

Amanda's saying that Meredith f*** bled to death was not making fun of Meredith. It was an insensitive thing to say to Meredith's friends, IMO. However, I think she was trying to get the point across that Meredith probably did suffer in her final few minutes, and her friends should be under no illusions about that. The cartwheel issue is disputed; I personally think that Amanda was stretching when a policeman saw her, and the cop might have asked her about other stretches or yoga poses. I would write more, but my shoulder is acting up.

 

[RoseMontague]

This episode, though indicative, is quite harmless, if you comapre that to her behaviour after MK`s murder. Regardless of what you think of her innocence or guilt, making fun of the victim ("she f****** bled to death", "sh** happens) and laughing besides MK`s mourning friends, turning cartwheels in the police station and thinking about writing a song about the murder leads you inevitably to the conclusion, that this person either:

-hated the victim to her bones
or
-showed ample evidence of a sociopathic behaviour
or
-was about to lose it, because she committed a non-premeditated murder
or
-any combination of these three things

As committing such a brutal crime, be it premeditated or not, is obviously sufficient ("thank you" Kevin Lowe for your "lesson" on necessity and sufficiency) for being a sociopath, it comes down to, she

-hated the victim to her bones
and/or
-she she showed ample evidence of being a sociopath

Personally I tend to rule out possibility 1 as everything I`ver read so far gave me the impression, that their relationship was in fact not that good but definetly not driven by hatred, too.

But, why the hell am I exerting myself to write this, I`m sure, there wil be a superficial four liner response post:
"AK didn`t hate MK, there were photos from both of them on AK`s laptop. Moreover AK ended an sms to MK with an "X", which means giving someone a kiss. So, in fact they were good friends.
And AK is a totally normal college girl. Everyone reacts different to traumatic events; her behaviour was nothing out of the normal."

I thought her behavior was odd as well. I don't see that as proof of her guilt but I do understand how the police thought it was suspicious and I also understand why they investigated and questioned her. I don't believe she is guilty and I think the reason she is in prison is that the police decided she was guilty based strictly on her behavior. I believe they coerced an incriminating statement and false accusation from her and tried their best to make flimsy evidence look as though it were solid.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I'll show you how it come out with with a 99 mm reference. I did it with approx. 96 mm widht in Sollecito's print, but with 99 (+3%) it is even better.

"even better" is very subjective.

My assessment on your pictures is that Guede's print has 5 visible mismatches at first sight where the Sollecito's print has matches or much closer results.

But we agree that both of the prints have mismatches, "much closer results" including.

Among these mismatches, the width of the bathmat print is bigger than Guede's (look at the right outline).

I would expect it to be bigger, considering the absorbent fluffy texture on the right.

In addition to the 5 areas of mismatch,

subjective and disputed

there are other logical clues, some of them regard the big toe: in regard to the particle on the right of the toe, the impressive aspect is its coincidence of its outline with the outline of the decoration embossed. Suggesting thus it was produced by contact with a more ample surface.

To me it suggests Guede's second toe, but it's just my subjective feeling.

Another aspect, is Guede's second toe, totally missing the particle,

Well it's not incredibly far away and toes are movable, we also should expect the stain to be a result of somewhat dynamically placed foot, unlike the reference print.

and a third aspect is the continuity of the stain betwen particle and the larger toe mark.

I see a discontinuity there

Finally, the lack of small toee is a point suggesting a general analogy, because Guede's footp puts a considerable body weight on the second toes, so I have to wonder how likely it is that he didn't pick up any blood on his small toes at all when the rest of the foot got complelety wet.

Completely wet? Not at all. The stain is incomplete and not made by a completely bloody foot. Whether we try to match one or the other print it lacks the right and front part, not only the toes.
The instep and heel is also mismatched with both prints. The only well articulated part is the ball of the foot and the big toe, which incidentally matches Guede well and Sollecito poorly.

To conclude, I hope we agree there is no way that print could be used to identify someone.
In my opinion it can maybe exclude Amanda, but to exclude Guede the way Rinaldi did is in my opinion dishonest, defying common sense and showing strong bias.

 

[Withnail1969]

Whoa!

There was a discussion that resolved the matter?

I'm playing catch up here - where was it? Can you point me in the right direction?

FYI, I'm not trying to "promote" anything, much less a "lie."

That's a pretty strong accusation. It's also completely unwarranted:

You can check it out yourself: http://web1.seattle.gov/courts/cpi/

Fact is, there IS a Seattle Municipal Court record in respect of Knox's police-issued citation for "Residential Disturbance" - the record indicates that the Court found the offense in question had been committed by Knox.

In my (common law) jurisdiction, we call that a "conviction."

Who cares?

Anyone that is at all interested in examining the veracity of the claims that Knox had NO history of unlawful conduct/ brushes with the law, and showed NO signs of mental illness/ sociopathy.

Of course there's a court record. How else would anyone know Amanda had paid the fine? In fact all this seems to be is a record of payment, nothing else.

Whatever 'your' jurisdiction is, it sure ain't Seattle or i would have thought an up and coming lawyer would be on his way to work by now after a hard night's forum posting.

I still don't see any way to class this citation as a conviction.

Case Details
Case Number: 202557635
Case Type: IN
Case Category:
Case Status: CLSE
End Date:
Filing Date: 7/2/2007
File Location: REC
Total Obligation Due: $0.00

Defendant Name: AMANDA MI KNOX
Defense Attorney:
Arraignment Waiver Date:
Attorney Waiver Date:
Jurisdiction End Date:
Jury Waiver Date:
Police Incident#:
Amount in Collection:

* Charges
* Citations
* Hearings
* Events
* Obligations

Sequence # Violation Desc. Plea Finding Disposition Code Dismissal Reason Close Date
1 RESIDENTIAL DISTURBANCE C PD Jul 07, 2007

 

[RoseMontague]

Whoa!

There was a discussion that resolved the matter?

I'm playing catch up here - where was it? Can you point me in the right direction?

FYI, I'm not trying to "promote" anything, much less a "lie."

That's a pretty strong accusation. It's also completely unwarranted:

You can check it out yourself: http://web1.seattle.gov/courts/cpi/

Fact is, there IS a Seattle Municipal Court record in respect of Knox's police-issued citation for "Residential Disturbance" - the record indicates that the Court found the offense in question had been committed by Knox.

In my (common law) jurisdiction, we call that a "conviction."

Who cares?

Anyone that is at all interested in examining the veracity of the claims that Knox had NO history of unlawful conduct/ brushes with the law, and showed NO signs of mental illness/ sociopathy.

It was a ticket for noise. You can call it what ever you want to call it but it is what it is and what it isn't is important.

 

[LiamG.]

Must be great to ask questions and then answer them yourself. As for 4 lines, I'm not sure they are warranted.

3 lines, even worse.

The police love to indulge in black humor because it eases the emotional pain. Perhaps we can accord Amanda some of the rights we accord our public servants.

show me a case, where police is indulging in black humor in the presence of mourning acquaintances. If a policeman is doing that, he`s a sociopath in my eyes. I accord AK the same right to behave like a sociopath as I accord our public servants the right.

Furthermore, cartwheels are a great way to restore circulation - especially if feeling light-headed.

We can all agree that this crime was sufficient to allow us to brand the murderer as a sociopath. What some of us don't believe is that the sociopath was Guede alone.

Thanks for confirming my prejudices; these were exactly the sort of answers I was expecting

 

[treehorn]

Treehorn,

Amanda had two intimate partners her whole time in Italy, Daniel (DeLuna?) and Raffaele Sollecito. They are not strangers and there were no others. She smoked cannabis. "Street drugs" is a potentially misleading term, and she is not claiming memory loss. Your claims seem to date from 2008 and generally were refuted by 2009.

Any further thoughts on sthort stories or manga, now that you have read my comments on these issues?

the time frame is 6 weeks (I may have laundry to do that's older) - she barely knew any of these men (she slept with RS the day she met him, for example)

you forgot the middle aged stranger on the train - that makes at least 3

you are also giving Knox a charitable interpretation of her ex post facto editing of the list of 7 names from "in Italy" to "in General"

you are also eliding the fact that (per Nadeau's book) even Knox's 6 days with RS were not monogamous - she had a little fun with Danny boy in the middle of those 6 days

at best, it looks like you have a girl that increased the number of sex partners dramatically in the weeks leading up to the murder

some of the sex was unprotected

why the reckless behavior?

mental illness/ sociopathy coming to the fore? (it's onset tends to be in late teens to early 20's, I believe)

was weed all there was to it?

was RS (and/or others) introducing her to coke for the first time? (RS had a problem with coke and a record for possession

when was the last time someone abusing alcohol or drugs admitted to ALL of it - if they tell you a "little weed", it's either a LOT of weed, or just the tip of the proverbial iceberg

admit it, there's SMOKE here

lots of it

definitive?

NO

but more than enough to do away with all of this happy horse**** about an All-American angel who just NEVER in a million years could get involved in a drug-fueled rape prank gone wrong