Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[christianahannah]

Another article dealing with Raffaele's additional filing and mentions Amanda's appeal documents. I am unsure whether this mention is of new documents being added to her appeal or just discussion of the contents of the original appeal.

http://www.umbrialeft.it/node/47152

 

[Machiavelli]

Here you talk about Raffaele's interrogations:


(...)

While yesterday, you wrote:

(..)


Sometimes you come across as being at odds with yourself.

But I an not at odds with myself. I take care of specifying the scope of any assertion when I write because I am certain the innocentisti will disguise its meaning any time they can. But I don't do it obviously on any verbal phrase. If you decide to misunderstand the meaning of logical quantificators, pronouns and connectors, you would always fnd the way to do it in the speech of any person. What I write is crystal clear to anyone who doesn't need all specifications on any sentence. There is no clue of existence of an interrogation of Sollecito except those that are perfecly known. There is no clue of any interrogation of Sollecito by Mignini. There is no clue of an interrogation in the time frame while the right to counsel was delayed.
Do you understand what happened in the sequence of Sollecito's interrogation or not? Do you understand the picture or not? I start to get tired of speaking of "what I say". You have now enough information to know exatcly what is known about the existence and nature of these interogations and of some statments that where made in those, you don't need to put furhter qustions.

 

[treehorn]

It is nice to see Kevin is alive.

Treehorn, is this your cue to start that creepy internet stalking behaviour? How about you do everyone a favour and stick to the topic at hand.

Has anyone seen a reference to how new Rudy's shoes were? Are we talking a few days or a few weeks?

"creepy"..."stalking"

That kind of insult is an insult to our intelligence. This is JREF.

If you have any manners, integrity or intelligence, you'll retract that ad hominem nonsense post-haste.

The "topic at hand" is Lowe's theory re the ligatures/ stomach contents and what appears to be a violation of his own rule prohibiting arguments that are not backed by peer-reviewed journals.

He has cited NOTHING to support his claims about:

1) the 'elasticity' of the human intestine/ ease of displacement of alimentary matter therein; and

2) the contents of the autopsy video.

(FYI, he could not have personal knowledge in respect of the first issue unless he was a medical doctor, and he could not have knowledge in respect of the second issue unless he was in the courtroom in Perugia and fluent in Italian.)

So I repeat: Does Lowe hold a M.D., or do we have a hypocrite in our midst?

 

[treehorn]

accidentally clicked submit before done/ see full post below

 

[Danceme]

We will be seeing a lot of this argument now; quadraginta already expressed it on the previous page:


I have seen it in another blog as well.

The computer analysis could come back completely vindicating both defendants, and the guilters will still be saying it's not as important as the evidence of lies.

Yes, I suppose we will Mary, until the exact facts of the logs are known, which may not be until the Appeal gets underway. It's quite valid to question whether these logs indicate they were basically up all night or not. What do you want people to do, just say "oh that's cool" and move on? It's human nature to question and try to interpret what things may mean, all of us here do it all the time.

I am going to continue to infer, from the context of the deep, deep regret he expresses in the diary as a whole, that during his interrogation with the police, he said things he would not have said without their "encouragement."

If that were true he would have said so, in his diary, regretting having succombed to their techniques.

 

[LondonJohn]

Well thank you for confirming it is only open on Saturdays in 2010 but whether it used to also open on Thursdays in 2007 remains to be seen, as I don't think one can summarily dismiss something written and published in the 2008 edition as "It was a typo/mistake". Neither you or I know that for certain.
Where I come from Thursday is a big party night, equal to Friday and much better than Saturday.

You're welcome. The big out-of-town discos were closed on Thursday 1st November 2007. The defence now apparently have affadavits and solid evidence to prove this. And therefore the disco buses were not running that night.

And if you think people are in the habit of partying until 4am or 5am on Thursday nights/Friday mornings, then working or going to university on Friday at 9-10am, then you come from a very different part of the world to me: a part of the world where productivity rates are appalling.....

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

But I an not at odds with myself. I take care of specifying the scope of any assertion when I write because I am certain the innocentisti will disguise its meaning any time they can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaWaQBxc0aI

What I write is crystal clear

Thanks for the chuckle.

 

[LondonJohn]

Yes, I suppose we will Mary, until the exact facts of the logs are known, which may not be until the Appeal gets underway. It's quite valid to question whether these logs indicate they were basically up all night or not. What do you want people to do, just say "oh that's cool" and move on? It's human nature to question and try to interpret what things may mean, all of us here do it all the time.

I don't think that Mary is suggesting that people should not question what it means. Quite the contrary. If the logs show that there was human activity with the computer throughout the night (and if that evidence is shown to be solid and unimpeachable), then it means that at least one out of Sollecito and Knox was in Sollecito's apartment all night, and that at least one of them was interacting with the computer throughout the night. This would mean, at the very least, that the circumstances under which the first court convicted Knox and Sollecito of murder were massively erroneous.

 

[treehorn]

I'm interested in knowing why you disappear every time halides1 asks you to respond to other posters' questions and requests for citations from you. It almost looks like you don't have any answers for them.

"Disappear"?! I have a family and a profession to practice - it takes time to wade through all of these posts.

I'm not "hiding" from anyone or anything.

Indeed, I'm giving careful consideration to the posts of Halides, and will get back to him/ her when I'm done.

PS The task of sorting through all of the posts is not made any easier by posters (they know who they are) that specialize in wasting the time/ effort of people making good faith attempts to discuss the case intelligently.

I'm growing weary of posters that facetiously ask for "citations" to sources that they're already familiar with, or that intentionally misrepresent the comments of others. I can't be the only one who feels this way.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

elastin

The "topic at hand" is Lowe's theory re the ligatures/ stomach contents and what appears to be a violation of his own rule prohibiting arguments that are not backed by peer-reviewed journals.

He has cited NOTHING to support his claims about:

1) the 'elasticity' of the human intestine/ ease of displacement of alimentary matter therein; and

2) the contents of the autopsy video.

(FYI, he could not have personal knowledge in respect of the first issue unless he was a medical doctor, and he could not have knowledge in respect of the second issue unless he was in the courtroom in Perugia and fluent in Italian.)

So I repeat: Does Lowe hold a M.D., or do we have a hypocrite in our midst?

Treehorn,

I cited a textbook on anatomy and physiology to address this point a few days ago. In addition, I just found on page 596 in the book Food Chemistry By Hans-Dieter Belitz, Werner Grosch, Peter Schieberle: "Intestines, with their high content of elastin, make excellent natural sausage casings." Elastin is a protein also found in lung tissue, and its name is indicative of its elastic properties. You can find a discussion of the relationship of elastin and the enzyme elastase to the disease emphysema in Garrett and Grisham's textbook Biochemistry.

Now that you are back and now that we have covered the elasticity of intestines, perhaps you could attend to some of the questions that have been addressed to you.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the goose and the gander

"Disappear"?! I have a family and a profession to practice - it takes time to wade through all of these posts.

I'm not "hiding" from anyone or anything.

Indeed, I'm giving careful consideration to the posts of Halides, and will get back to him/ her when I'm done.

Treehorn,

If you have time to post a question that has already been answered, then you have time to answer the questions that have been asked of you. With your concerns about manners and integrity, as well as your disapproval of hypocrisy, I just know that you will strive to answer them with deliberate speed.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

As RoseMontague most recently documented

Yes, I suppose we will Mary, until the exact facts of the logs are known, which may not be until the Appeal gets underway. It's quite valid to question whether these logs indicate they were basically up all night or not. What do you want people to do, just say "oh that's cool" and move on? It's human nature to question and try to interpret what things may mean, all of us here do it all the time.



If that were true he would have said so, in his diary, regretting having succombed to their techniques.

Raffaele made a de facto retraction of what he said on the 5th-6th with his statements in front of Judge Matteini on the 8th. Works for me.

 

[Antony]

Although I harbor no certainties or even opinions about any specific acts by Knox, my general overview of what we seem to know has led me to believe that the girl is hiding something ... something serious and non-trivial.

I'm afraid you come across as someone harbouring plenty of certainties, while being deeply scornful of anyone offering a different interpretation of the mass of factoids on offer in this case.

If you base your judgement of the case on the conviction "that girl is hiding something", then why can't you ask yourself "are the police hiding something?" Let me give you a few pointers:

• they interrogated Amanda overnight without a video or audio recording of what happened;

• they wrecked the hard-drives of 3 computers belonging to the suspects and the murder victim;

• they presented critical DNA evidence, but withheld details about how that "evidence" was obtained.

That will do just for starters - I can provide other examples if you don't think that's enough, as I'm sure others here can.

You appear to be demanding transparency on the part of the accused in this case, but seem completely unconcerned about the lack of transparency on the part of the investigation.

I have no concrete, stepwise defense of this feeling, but taken in concert with certain aspects of what we seem to know that are less than thoroughly explained I am not confident that Knox is the untarnished angel her advocates would like to present her as. Just how tarnished or complicit she may be I do not know, and as a consequence am unwilling to offer any conjecture.

That's the difference between you and me. You're suspicious of the accused - I'm suspicious of the investigation. You see the unrecorded, disputed, overnight interrogation of Amanda as an indictment of her; I see it as an indictment of the Perugia police. This comes back to the lengthy exchange between you and Kevin Lowe over Amanda's Nov 6 statements: it makes no difference how many times the characteristics of coerced false statements are explained to you, you won't entertain the idea because you've already decided who the target of your suspicion is going to be.

My view is that unless the investigation can be shown to be transparent (it can't), and unless the prosecution can be shown to have been based on facts and not suspicion (it can't), then the verdict was the wrong one.

 

[Machiavelli]

(..)
I am going to continue to infer, from the context of the deep, deep regret he expresses in the diary as a whole, that during his interrogation with the police, he said things he would not have said without their "encouragement."

Or without Amanda's encouragement, as he actually claims.

I notice the absence of any fact that would describe this encouragement. Do you notice this total lack?
Do you notice the absence of such description and explanation in his diary?

The GIP and the lawyers apparently noticed this lack of explaination and description of the "abuses" in the trial hearing interrogation / statements before the GIP.

Did you notice this lack of clue of any "abuse" in his report also at the GIP interrogation? While in his diary, did you notice the tone of downplay and denial he uses to describe his contradiction, and that he tries to re-formulize his testimony instead of explaning it?
Your inference is based on his "regret"?

 

[LondonJohn]

Treehorn,

I cited a textbook on anatomy and physiology to address this point a few days ago. In addition, I just found on page 596 in the book Food Chemistry By Hans-Dieter Belitz, Werner Grosch, Peter Schieberle: "Intestines, with their high content of elastin, make excellent natural sausage casings." Elastin is a protein also found in lung tissue, and its name is indicative of its elastic properties. You can find a discussion of the relationship of elastin and the enzyme elastase to the disease emphysema in Garrett and Grisham's textbook Biochemistry.

Now that you are back and now that we have covered the elasticity of intestines, perhaps you could attend to some of the questions that have been addressed to you.

Yes, this is getting very tiresome. One does not have to be a qualified doctor to know that the human small intestine is elastic and around 5m in length.

But, for anyone who's interested, Dr Gunther von Hagen (the "Bodyworks" guy) did an excellent series for Channel 4 here in the UK showing real-life autopsies, and explaining as he went along. Here's a link:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=49CBA27DCC8BDE9E

The relevant episodes are Lesson 3: Digestion (1-5). I'm actually blocked from viewing them in the UK (for copyright reasons), but if you live outside the UK you should be able to see them. They are very interesting and informative programmes, but are obviously of a sensitive nature, owing to the fact that a real dead person is being analysed on the autopsy table. IIRC, von Hagen describes the small intestine in some detail, and he also stretches out the whole digestive tract in a straight line to show just how long it is.

 

[samba]

Originally Posted by quadraginta
Although I harbor no certainties or even opinions about any specific acts by Knox, my general overview of what we seem to know has led me to believe that the girl is hiding something ... something serious and non-trivial.

I have no problems with Quadraginta's post. He is being honest about his feelings and, as simply a poster to a forum, is entitled to "beliefs", "feelings", "hunches", or whatever. My problem is that the court apparently has taken this same attitude and yet is disguising it as justice. It's been talked about a lot on here...instead of "innocent until proven guilty", this court seems to say...we "believe" you are guilty....prove to us that you are innocent. The Massei Report has this written all over it. A forum poster can state what they think might have happened, the courts need to "prove" it.

 

[Alt+F4]

I already have taken the position that Amanda and Raffaele slept very little that night. Katody wrote, "the longest period of inactivity is from 6:22 in the morning to midday of Nov the 2nd." That makes sense to me -- they were finally catching up on their sleep.

What about the day trip to Gubbio? Amanda testified that the whole reason for going back to her apartment that morning was to take a shower and change clothes for the trip. Part of the reason for shutting off her phone, she said, was to save the battery for the trip.

Amanda never stated that the trip was cancelled or postposted from when she said it would be, on the morning of the 2nd.

 

[Magister]

What about the day trip to Gubbio? Amanda testified that the whole reason for going back to her apartment that morning was to take a shower and change clothes for the trip. Part of the reason for shutting off her phone, she said, was to save the battery for the trip.

Amanda never stated that the trip was cancelled or postposted from when she said it would be, on the morning of the 2nd.

There were also the 3 phone calls between Sollecito and his father around 9 am.

 

[RWVBWL]

Or without Amanda's encouragement, as he actually claims.

I notice the absence of any fact that would describe this encouragement. Do you notice this total lack?
Do you notice the absence of such description and explanation in his diary?

The GIP and the lawyers apparently noticed this lack of explaination and description of the "abuses" in the trial hearing interrogation / statements before the GIP.

Did you notice this lack of clue of any "abuse" in his report also at the GIP interrogation? While in his diary, did you notice the tone of downplay and denial he uses to describe his contradiction, and that he tries to re-formulize his testimony instead of explaning it?
Your inference is based on his "regret"?

Greetings Machiavelli,
One of the JREF crew here posted a link to PMF,
so I clicked onto it and enjoyed more hate about how Amanda Knox looks and what stupid posters we are here on JREF.
But that's not my point.

In a post at PMF by Fuji -(who also is a member here), on Tue Nov 09, 2010 12:33 pm,
he quotes an article about somebody named Spader who was involved in a murder.

“I didn’t want to believe what was happening,” said Glover, of Amherst, who agreed to testify against Spader in return for a lighter sentence.

So I wonder:
If Raffaele Sollecito was not at his apartment, but was there the night that Miss Kercher was brutally stabbed to her death,
why did he not simply turn "State's witness" against Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede in the very beginning?

Heck, from what I have read, he was only bangin' Amanda Knox for 6 or 7 days and didn't even know Rudy Guede.
IMHO, there is no luv lost for either of these 2 if he was truly involved in Miss Kercher's death.
Why not turn on them and recieve a lighter sentence?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

PS-Folks sometimes talk about, well ok, write about Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's drug use.
I guesss they got high at Raffaelle's apartment the night Miss Kercher was murdered.

But what I really want to know is what had Rudy Guede been smokin' or drinkin' that night he was in Meredith Kercher's bedroom when she died?
Hmmm...

 

[Scorpion NITE]

You're welcome. The big out-of-town discos were closed on Thursday 1st November 2007. The defence now apparently have affadavits and solid evidence to prove this. And therefore the disco buses were not running that night.

And if you think people are in the habit of partying until 4am or 5am on Thursday nights/Friday mornings, then working or going to university on Friday at 9-10am, then you come from a very different part of the world to me: a part of the world where productivity rates are appalling.....

Here is what Frank Sfarzo says on the subject in a reply to one of the comments on his blog (Perugia Shock) - the bolding is mine and I think it could not be clearer - Frank Sfarzo, the Perugia local:

'' I can confirm that the big discotheques are closed on November 1st, and there weren't buses. As is natural, since the discotheques work on the pre-holiday, not on the holiday, and to be filled they need a town full of students, not with the 80% of them gone home.

But Sollecito's team will bring documentation for it.

Btw, I remember to have asked Toto, at the beginning, why he remembered the masks and didn't remember the buses. He thought that he HAD to remember the opposite, so at the trial he didn't mention the masks but he mentioned the buses.

So, more than one year after our previous talk I congratulated to him for his testimony and I asked him why he remembered the buses. At that point he understood that the buses were wrong too (but too late). And he answered that he was confused with the city buses....

But all this is useless. The truth is that people believe what they want to believe...''