• 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.
Believe me, I had changed my tune about Knox and Sollecito well before I "left" PMF. And PMF itself was a significant reason why I changed my view. It turned out that in "Darkness Descending" and PMF I had chosen my first two information sources that were heavily biased towards guilt and/or stunningly inaccurate. Fortunately, my mounting concern at behaviours and attitudes on PMF, coupled with a desire to search other information sources, soon began to convince me that my initial impressions were wrong. And I'm totally comfortable with admitting that. I'm still interested that someone chose to use up a portion of their presumably valuable time in "researching" some of my initial posts on PMF. I wonder why?
 
I think this whole issue of phone call lengths may be another area of misapprehension. I believe that call records only record the length of time after the connection of the call. In other words, any "ring tone" time is not included. (..)

Actually, I'm afraid you are wrong.
It is not my area of expertise, but it happened that I learend a bit about hte subject at the time. Now my knowledge is not 100% certain, but i recall the issue of the ringing time was important for those who work in the field. Telephone companies record the connection from the start of the ringing tone, because technically that's very important for them. It is a subject worth of further investigation though.
 
Based on the knowledge I have till now, if your question was: "do you feel that Amanda and Filomena had trouble communicating with each other?", my answer is no, I don't feel Amanda and Filomena misunderstood each other because of language problems.
I also don't feel Amanda and Filomena had real communication problems in their everyday life, they were not exactly like foreign people.

And I think if having already called Meredith - who didn't answer - was an important piece of communication in Amanda's view, she would have managed to have this information understood by recipient immediately.

Thanks for your response.
 
I wonder what has happened to the promised piece on TJMK comparing Knox and Sollecito to other "ordinary" killers? Maybe a little more research showed that murderers such as Brenda Spencer (the "I don't like Mondays" killer) and Homolka/Bernardo actually had backgrounds and pre-crime warning factors that were massively different to Knox and Sollecito? Should be good to read when it finally appears though!
 
The fact is, if I try to explain how I see the topic, it is something that must be contextualized and linked to the cross questioning of Filomena Romanelli. I didn't remember this Filomena's voice in the intercepted call, but the misunderstanding in a voice conversation can happen also between people both native of the same mother tongue. Think for example at the sound of words like "I called" and "I'll call". Is it possible to mistake one for another while you speak on the cell phone? It is certainly possible. The point is that you can never exclude a possible misunderstanding of words, if you base your judgement solely on an assessmnt the understanding of language. The level of comprehension and speaking of language actually is not the main factor in determining if the people understand each other in conversation. The understanding in a conversation, in this case dealing with basic language functions, is not something directly linked to the command of language but in the cases at the extreme ends, when the speakers both lack even of the very basic rudiments of the second language, certaily not the case of Amanda and Filomena. When people have a base or intermediate level of understanding they have the resources to understand each other properly on a topics that require the use of basic functions and basic grammar distinctions.
Whether they misunderstood each other, it is not something that we can speculate about based on their language skills, because they both have command of basic levels and they have resources to understand each other.
It is more important to examine their testimonies and recollections, their contextual actions and conversation, and their phone records.

I'm not sure I agree here. On the one hand you acknowledge that, even amongst native speakers, there's still plenty of scope for misunderstanding, especially via a phone call where the words may not be that clear anyway. On the other, you seem to say that it's only at an extremely basic level that someone's grasp of another language has any impact on their ability to understand and be understood by another person. I don't see any logical reason to accept that: it seems almost self-evident that if someone is talking in a language they're not fluent in, there's a much greater likelihood that they'll misunderstand or be misunderstood when speaking in that language. Obviously, that handicap would decrease in proportion to their fluency in that language, but it would always be an additional element in possible misunderstanding which wouldn't apply to the native speaker.

In this case, I would say that both Amanda and Filomena were at a basic level in Italian and English, so much so that the translator gives up and just says she can't understand Filomena's English. Filomena can't express herself well enough to be understood in English, so she switches to Italian. That in itself is an indication her English was pretty poor.

I remember you yourself saying in a previous post that Katody (I think it was) had misunderstood you because, not being a native speaker of English, you hadn't expressed yourself very well. Yet your English is excellent, and you were also expressing yourself in writing. How much more difficult would it have been for Filomena and Amanda (or Amanda and any of the others, for that matter) to understand each other, with their far more basic knowledge of each other's languages and in a spoken (even a telephone) conversation?

Amanda had called just one of the Meredith's phones, that was ringing for only 16 seconds. Then after she called again Meredith for 3 and 4 seconds. Filomena recalled several things, not only about previous or future calls to Meredith, abut also about Amanda's locations and movements in that moment. Amanda gave a recollection in her e-mail and witness reports. This is the material to be used for an assessment.

I'm not sure whether Filomena called Meredith's phones at all, but if she did, it seems she only called the English phone (since Massei seems to give a full list of the calls made to the Italian phone). So either Filomena only called Meredith's English phone, or she didn't call her at all, making her even 'guiltier' in this respect than Amanda. I believe Amanda also said she called the English phone because it was the one Meredith always carried with her, and since Massei says there were 'numerous' calls to this phone but only a handful to the other, it appears many other people agreed.

I think your other points are misleading: 16 seconds is quite a long time to let a call ring for (probably about the time an answerphone normally kicks in) and the following two calls went through to an out of service message and voicemail, thus accounting for their short duration.
 
Greetings Draca,
I am curious if anyone can shed any light on where Miss Kercher usually put her house keys.
Reading in Barbie Nadeau's book "Angel Face" on page 13 it says:
"The house was L-shaped, with a covered portico at the front that opened into a tiny foyer where the girls hung keys, parked umbrellas, and kept a bulletin board with messages to each other." Etc...

If so, did Meredith also hang her keys there too?
I wonder if this area was ever tested for fingerprints?

I'm also curious if Meredith had left any mean messages for Amanda on the bulletin board?
Maybe something such as "Don't forget to flush Amanda", "Please clean the toilet Amanda", "Don't bring home too many guys Amanda"...
You know, the kind of things that author B. Nadeau likes to point out that, I guess, seem to reflect on Amanda Knox's character and then stick out to me as I re-read her book and its particular view of this brutal murder.
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

Wow, I missed that one when I read the book. I would love to see if a photo of this message board exists. Charlie, can you see if you have anything on video?
 
Believe me, I had changed my tune about Knox and Sollecito well before I "left" PMF. And PMF itself was a significant reason why I changed my view. It turned out that in "Darkness Descending" and PMF I had chosen my first two information sources that were heavily biased towards guilt and/or stunningly inaccurate. Fortunately, my mounting concern at behaviours and attitudes on PMF, coupled with a desire to search other information sources, soon began to convince me that my initial impressions were wrong. And I'm totally comfortable with admitting that. I'm still interested that someone chose to use up a portion of their presumably valuable time in "researching" some of my initial posts on PMF. I wonder why?

A true believer that doesn't allow himself to be swayed by arguments is likely to interpret your change of heart as a character flaw.
 
Actually, I'm afraid you are wrong.
It is not my area of expertise, but it happened that I learend a bit about hte subject at the time. Now my knowledge is not 100% certain, but i recall the issue of the ringing time was important for those who work in the field. Telephone companies record the connection from the start of the ringing tone, because technically that's very important for them. It is a subject worth of further investigation though.

Fair enough, if you're right. I know that all billing records are based on actual call connections (i.e. an open line), but if you're saying that mobile operators also time calls from the first call notification (ring tone etc) - and that these are the timings used in the analysis of these particular phone calls - then I defer to your greater knowledge.
 
The American Bar Association has standards for DNA evidence that include release of the electronic data files to the defense. Yet, they have not been released to the defense, despite the prosecution's having nearly three years in which to do so. I am at a loss for why the logic of releasing them should stop at the border of any one particular country. Maybe you can explain it to me.

Maybe you can explain to me why you have been asked over and over again to provide evidence that this information was not released to the defense and you still can't.

Chris, here are some of your previous excuses for not providing evidence of this claim:

Halides1 said:
We know that the fsa files were not in the possession of the nine forensic scientists who signed the petition of
Halides1 said:
]19 November 2009, because this document mentions their absence.

How does this prove that the prosecution refused to turn the files over? How many of these nine are being called as expert wtnesses in the appeal?

Halides1 said:
DNA forensic expert professor Dan Krane said, “The biggest concern that I personally have regarding this case is the refusal of the prosecution to provide the defense with a copy of the electronic data that underlies the DNA test results -- that is virtually unheard of world-wide today and it would be especially important to review that data in a case such as this which seems to involve such low level samples.”
What specific evidence does Dr. Krane have as to the accusations made in this quote? Is he going to testify under oath at the appeal that he knows the prosecution refused to provide the defense with a copy of the electronic data? If his schedule is too busy to travel to Italy is he going to at least submit a sworn affidavit to the defense team?

How about just providing Dr. Krane's statement that he requested the files from the prosecution or the crime lab and was refused them?

Halides1 said:
I seem to recall that the defense made a formal request in the summer.
Cite? Link?

Halides1 said:
Besides the open letter, I have previously cited two articles that implied that disclosure of forensic information was incomplete. From one of them, an article by Bob Graham in December 2009, “Other forensic experts in several countries – including two from
Halides1 said:
Britain – have started to study the DNA results but have delayed giving a verdict until they have received precise details on the methodology used by their Italian counterparts.”

According to that article, “The failure of the prosecution to provide these details to Knox and Sollecito's defence teams is one of their central complaints.” Again, no evidence, no links to court documents that this is true.

Halides1 said:
Finally, I asked Chris Mellas, and he said that the fsa files had not been turned over
Where is the protest about this from Amanda’s defense team documented?

The bottom line here is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the files were not released.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, if you're right. I know that all billing records are based on actual call connections (i.e. an open line), but if you're saying that mobile operators also time calls from the first call notification (ring tone etc) - and that these are the timings used in the analysis of these particular phone calls - then I defer to your greater knowledge.

That is interesting. There are 5 calls between 1 November and 2 November that are shown to last only 1 second from Amanda's phone. That would seem to be pretty fast measured from the first ring.
 
Alt+F4,
I wonder if you had any luck finding the source for that claim that the defense held up the return to pick up the bra clasp. The reason I was asking is that Trigood made the same claim today.
 
The Seattle Court record is unequivocal. I looked it up. I've seen it.

The court found Knox (and Knox alone) to have committed the offense ("Residential Disturbance").

As a penalty, a fine was then imposed.

And what proof do you have that "friends" reimbursed her?

Were these friends the "real rock throwers"?

Were these friends also lessees?

On what grounds are you able to claim that, despite the public record of Knox's conviction, she "played no part in the disturbance"?!

Are you saying the Seattle Municipal Court got it wrong, too?!

"Wrongfully convicted" in BOTH Seattle and Perugia?!

Imagine the odds.

Treehorn doyou live in the US? Its a noise polution violation. Its like a traffic ticket. You get the same ticket if you are driving through a residental area and your radio is playing to loud in your car.
 
Fair enough, if you're right. I know that all billing records are based on actual call connections (i.e. an open line), but if you're saying that mobile operators also time calls from the first call notification (ring tone etc) - and that these are the timings used in the analysis of these particular phone calls - then I defer to your greater knowledge.

It would be relatively simple to check for me - I have a number on the same telephone company of Filomena's at the time - I shall look at my traffic records and do some test calls. But I never had a friendly relation with the Vodafone site and I don't feel like struggling again with passwords now.
Anyway voice mail services are redirected on a server, they not connections to the SIM. A ringing tone on the phone requires connection to the device.
 
Last edited:
Alt+F4,
I wonder if you had any luck finding the source for that claim that the defense held up the return to pick up the bra clasp. The reason I was asking is that Trigood made the same claim today.

I haven't forgotten. I don't speak Italian and don't like any of the translation engines online. I have a good friend who speaks/reads fluent Italian who is reading a few links I sent him.
 
Last edited:
According to this you pay Municipal Court Citations online, like with parking tickets.

http://find.seattle.gov/search?q=pa...e=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&ud=1&site=default_collection

That's why I find Knox's Seattle court record curious.

Applying the rules of my (common law) jurisdiction to this scenario, there'd be no record of the Court's "finding" if Knox admitted to having violated the Seattle Municipal Code simply by electing to pay the fine for the unlawful conduct in question.

In my jurisdiction, a court record, available for public inspection, results only where an accused: 1) elects to challenge a citation in a hearing with a magistrate; 2) elects to offer evidence of mitigating factors in such a hearing or 3) fails to respond to a citation.

Ergo I'm inclined to believe Knox either tried to fight the citation or offered mitigating circumstances in respect of it (to no avail).

In any event, the record is clear: the Municipal Court of Seattle "found" Knox "committed the offense" of "Residential Disturbance" under the Seattle Municipal Code: An unlawful act.

In the result, we now have an official record that proves Knox violated the civil and property rights of others, in a manner that resulted in police action, some 4 months before the murder.

At the very least, this fact does nothing - NOTHING - to counter the argument that Knox may well have been exhibiting the signs and symptoms of sociopathy in the months leading up to the murder, particularly when the unlawful conduct is considered in light of her contemporaneous abuse of alcohol and street drugs (to the point of memory loss) and promiscuity (3 to 6 strangers in 6 weeks).
 
Last edited:
You seem to believe a civil infraction is a conviction when it has been clearly pointed out to you that it is not. Your continued insistence that Amanda received a criminal conviction from the Seattle court is skating very close to libelling Amanda.

Has anyone with a criminal record ever tried to get a passport in the US?
 
It would be relatively simple to check for me - I have a number on the same telephone company of Filomena's at the time - I shall look at my traffic records and do some test calls. But I never had a friendly relation with the Vodafone site and I don't feel like struggling again with passwords now.
Anyway voice mail services are redirected on a server, they not connections to the SIM. A ringing tone on the phone requires connection to the device.

A ringing tone on the phone does not require a connection to the device - not in the sense of an "open line" connection. If I call your mobile from my mobile, it gets to the central Vodafone Italia switch centre, which knows the ID of the base station your mobile last made contact with. It then routes an "incoming call" ping signal to that base station, which sends it to your phone. If your phone is still in contact with that base station, the ping instructs it to start ringing, and probably also brings my caller ID up on your screen. Simultaneously, your phone pings the base station to let it know that you've received the incoming call alert, and this is relayed back to me by letting me hear a ring tone in my ear. It's only when you press "answer", however, that an actual duplex connection is made over two adjoining radio frequencies.
 
Has anyone with a criminal record ever tried to get a passport in the US?

A person with a felony or misdemeanor conviction can get a United States passport as long as they have completed their sentence and is not on probation or parole.

What Amanda received was a violation.
 
Last edited:
You do not understand the meaning of the word, "conviction."

(HINT: the Seattle Municipal Code you've been quoting spells it out for you.)

Yup the City of Seattle Municipal Court.
The Court adjudicates misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor crimes, infractions, and civil violations.
You will notice that it clearly distinguishes between crimes, infractions and civil violations. It doesn't put them in the same category.
Was knox forced to go before a judge or was she allowed to pay the fine without attending court?
 
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.
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. Among these mismatches, the width of the bathmat print is bigger than Guede's (look at the right outline).
In addition to the 5 areas of mismatch, 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. Another aspect, is Guede's second toe, totally missing the particle, and a third aspect is the continuity of the stain betwen particle and the larger toe mark. 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. I am lead to think the print was from a foot that didn't use to have much contact on its small toes.

One thing I will say is this. Whoever, left that bloody footprint, their big toe should be smaller than the imprinted one. But i'm willing to bet they didn't experiment with a wet footprint to see how much the print spread when the mat absorbed the water. If they did, I'd be interested to see the results.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom