• 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.
Alt+F4 said:
"20 years further up the road"?. Yeah, nothing about getting the details right? :rolleyes:

Anyway, what the heck are you talking about? Where is the post about the kebob shop?
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out the typo. You'll be happy to know it's corrected now. And well done for the faux-naivete as well. I presume that it's forbidden in your "rules" to refer to any non-JREF-originated literature - such as press reports or even the Massei report? Of course I'm assuming that you're not just being obstructionist....
 
Last edited:
Matthew Best said:
I guess if you put it like that there is no possible comparison. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thank you. Could someone just provide even one case where someone was convicted of murder based on a confession that they were only present at the scene of the the murder but did not participate in that murder?
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Thanks for pointing out the typo. You'll be happy to know it's corrected now. And well done for the faux-naivete as well. I presume that it's forbidden in your "rules" to refer to any non-JREF-originated literature - such as press reports or even the Massei report? Of course I'm assuming that you're not just being obstructionist....
Click to expand...

I don't make the rules at the JREF but it would be nice if you could be specific as to what you are referring to. When folks refer to the Massei Report, they usually say, "according to the Massei Report, on page <whatever>". When you refer to disco buses two weeks ago and what they may or may not mean, just tell us where you are getting that information from and provide a link. Ok?
 
Last edited:
Alt+F4 said:
How can there be a comparison to the Amanda Knox case and these other 39 cases when none of those cases involve someone being convicted of murder or rape based on a false confession of only being present at the scene of a murder but not participating in it?
Click to expand...

Exactly, even more curiously, none of those cases involve a confession of seeing someone's boss who is a bar owner of African provenience. How can there be any comparison?:rolleyes:
 
Alt+F4 said:
Thank you. Could someone just provide even one case where someone was convicted of murder based on a confession that they were only present at the scene of the the murder but did not participate in that murder?
Click to expand...

Why do you think anybody needs to do this? Is no comparison valid unless absolutely every element is exactly the same?
 
Alt+F4 said:
Thank you. Could someone just provide even one case where someone was convicted of murder based on a confession that they were only present at the scene of the the murder but did not participate in that murder?
Click to expand...

Here's just such a coerced confession. Fortunately, he could subsequently prove that he was in a whole different continent at the time of the murder, but otherwise who knows what might have happened in a trial....

http://www.yourdiscovery.com/video/secrets-of-interrogation-admission-of-guilt/

I realise this guy wasn't actually convicted (as per your request), thanks to the happy emergence of an unimpeachable alibi, but all the other elements (false confession to being there but not actually committing the murder) are there. Does that help at all?
 
Alt+F4 said:
The Conspiracy Theory sub-forum is that-a-way -->. I've been posting on the JREF long before Amanda Knox ever left for Italy.
Click to expand...

That was a total non-sequitur. Who mentioned conspiracies or your length of time on JREF? I assume you know what I meant by "faux-naivete"?
 
Matthew Best said:
Why do you think anybody needs to do this? Is no comparison valid unless absolutely every element is exactly the same?
Click to expand...

Not every element has to be exactly the same but how about the main one, the defendents in ALL of those cases confessed to COMMITTING the actual crime. Amanda Knox didn't.
 
LondonJohn said:
Hehe SA's latest "devastating" video on PMF has identified the wrong kebab restaurant
Click to expand...

Alt+F4 said:
Anyway, what the heck are you talking about? Where is the post about the kebab shop?
Click to expand...

LondonJohn said:
well done for the faux-naivete as well.
Click to expand...

Alt+F4 said:
The Conspiracy Theory sub-forum is that-a-way -->. I've been posting on the JREF long before Amanda Knox ever left for Italy.
Click to expand...

Alt, you're being particularly evasive today. Generally speaking, I give you more credit than that. Why don't you answer my question I directed at you earlier? In case you don't feel like re-reading it, I'll simplify it here for you:

The false confessions everyone has been citing are evidence that police can get a suspect to say things that aren't true. Instead of arguing the semantics of what a false confession is, why don't you tell us why you can say for certain that Amanda's interrogation involved no coercion and that what she said was of her own free will?
 
Alt+F4 said:
Not every element has to be exactly the same but how about the main one, the defendents in ALL of those cases confessed to COMMITTING the actual crime. Amanda Knox didn't.
Click to expand...

What makes you so sure that this is the main element when it comes to comparing confessions and determining whether they are true or false?
 
LondonJohn said:
Here's just such a coerced confession. Fortunately, he could subsequently prove that he was in a whole different continent at the time of the murder, but otherwise who knows what might have happened in a trial....

http://www.yourdiscovery.com/video/secrets-of-interrogation-admission-of-guilt/

I realise this guy wasn't actually convicted (as per your request), thanks to the happy emergence of an unimpeachable alibi, but all the other elements (false confession to being there but not actually committing the murder) are there. Does that help at all?
Click to expand...

Doesn't apply. Unlike Amanda Knox, that guy also confessed to the murder.

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/LegalCenter/story?id=1779251&page=1
 
Last edited:
Matthew Best said:
What makes you so sure that this is the main element when it comes to comparing confessions and determining whether they are true or false?
Click to expand...

Read Rose's link! The men were convicted based on confessions that they committed the crimes they were accused of.
 
Matthew Best said:
Unresponsive. Evasion noted.
Click to expand...

You must be having a conversation with others in your own head.

1. Amanda Knox never made a confession of murder.
2. All the cases linked to false confessions in this thread relate to someone who made a false confession of actually committing a murder or rape THEMSELVES.
3. Therefore, none of the case of false confession regarding murder have anything to do with Amanda Knox's case.

Get it?
 
Last edited:
halides1 said:
Kaosium,

If one scenario is as likely as another, then I am well into the reasonable-doubt range.
Click to expand...

I suspect were you on that jury we wouldn't be discussing this now. However to some it might undermine one of the defense's strongest points: the forensics of the murder site.

halides1 said:
As for Ms. Nadeau's article, it is because she wrote things like her Newsweek piece, and nothing that I have ever seen about how Ms. Knox's picture went up in the hallway of the Rome police or how the Perugia police paraded the three suspects through the old town upon their arrest, that I take her self-evaluation of being objective at something less than face value.
Click to expand...

I am unsure of what you mean here, other than Nadeau's objectivity is questionable. Which brings to mind one reason I didn't seek out her opinions specifically was it seemed both sides disliked her and complained of her factual errors.

As for the picture of Amanda in the hallway in Rome, is that actually true? I came across a reference to that and I discounted it as being a mistake as it seemed barely possible.
 
Alt+F4 said:
...none of the case of false confession regarding murder have anything to do with Amanda Knox's case.
Click to expand...


Congratulations, this is actually a true statement. Only Amanda Knox's false confession has anything to do with Amanda Knox's case.


Why are you demanding to be shown cases of similar false confessions that have nothing to do with the case at hand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom