Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Machiavelli]

Machiavelli,

This is the second time you have written something that implies you see a conflict between civil liberties and determining the truth in a criminal case. (..)

My writings don't imply such a conflict, but in your interpretation (in your mind).

The conflict could be between determining the truth in a criminal case and your ideas about civil liberties and justice.

 

[daydreamer]

They could have come home early.

Sadly, someone did come home early, leaving Rudy few options for an exit since a key was needed to exit the front door. He was then trapped with someone who recognized him immediately.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

case strength is inversely related to the assault on the character of the accused

There's an interesting phenomenon on the Internet, in which people who have never met Amanda think they have a better handle on what she is like than the people who have known her for many years.

Charlie,

This comment is spot-on. Peter Applebome reported on the Duke lacrosse incident, “Nona Farahnik, who lived in the same dormitory as Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Seligmann [the first two players to be indicted], said, ‘When they said it was Reade and Collin, everyone knew it didn’t happen.’” If Ms. Farahnik’s words are not enough, then one could have consulted Mr. Seligmann’s high school guidance counselor, or the family who asked Collin to baby-sit for them, or…

My point is that when the evidence is weak, the prosecutor will always attack the character of the accused, and the media will often abet him.

 

[Magister]

deleted

 

[Machiavelli]

(..)

Yet you no doubt think that life in jail for Amanda and Raffaele is quite fair. That's the point I'm making.

I don't know if your point is about laws, or about the fact Amanda can be innocent.
My point is not that life in jail is fair, my point is Amanda is guilty. This doesn't depend on the penalty.
If you want to make a point about that you don't like the law, please first study what you are talking about, and avoid comparisons between Amanda and mafia cooperators. If you wish Amanda to be treated like a mafia cooperator, you should start by suggesting she should declare to be guilty of a murder, as all mafia cooperators do.

 

[platonov]

We point out that the guilter case is based largely on irrational and irrelevant attacks on Amanda and Raffaele's characters (ranging from the mild but factual claims about comic books, knives, casual sex and marijuana use to utterly baseless and frankly vile claims about hard drug addictions, psychopathy or sociopathy and so on) and they respond that the case for innocence must be based on an irrational desire to defend young white people and by implication racism directed at poor, misunderstood Rudy Guede.

This is despite the fact that you'll go a long, long way before you find a single racist attack on Guede based on his ethnicity in these threads. Yet you can barely swing a cat in the guilter forums without hitting someone claiming that Amanda is an emotionless, narcissistic, heroin-shooting psychopath, Raffaele is a deeply disturbed nutcase obsessed with sex murder, and that Rudy Guede was a very nice young man who had no history of violence and who would never have murdered a young woman and raped her as she died without someone like Amanda Knox leading him astray.

Needless to say, absent relevant supporting facts (like a professional diagnosis) these arguments are deeply flawed.

What's this 'guilter' thing ...... so there is lots of superfluous internet comment on the case ?

Big deal, that's not what convicted all 3, despite 'innocentsi' talking points*/claims to the contrary.
*the ridiculous cartwheel argument which started this [since renamed] thread for example.

They were convicted on the evidence as presented in court. [televised legal maneuvering notwithstanding].

If you wish to wage war on other sites and the mods are happy to allow it - Fine, but its of no relevance to the actual proceedings in court. (and of little interest to me).

PS My post was a response to CW and my points general in nature & I stand by them.

.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

inferences

Even with the edit it doesn't make sense to me

ETA Even with 2 edits.

My own edit 2 - you didn't respond on the main body of my post regarding nonsensical inferences.

.

Platonov,

Now you know how I feel reading your messages. With respect to your other comment, I am not sure what you mean. Are you referring to #14138 where you say that a phantom interrogation has dropped off the radar? I am not sure, but I suppose you doubt that PM Mignini interrogated Ms. Knox and/or Mr. Sollecito that night. I have two possible inferences from Mr. Mignini's presence: (1) The Perugia police were having such fun playing Chutes and Ladders with Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito that they decided they had better call Mr. Mignini or he would be angry with them for excluding him. (2) Mr. Mignini, like Dr. Giobbi, was there to direct the interrogations, possibly from behind the scenes. I consider one of these inferences to be nonsensical.

 

[Dan O.]

Reading back through his diary

"I remember that I surfed the Internet for a bit, maybe I watched a
film and then that you had called me at the house or that anyhow you
sent me a goodnight message."

The first quote doesn't even come close to describing a night mainly spent on the computer till all hours of the morning as the defence is claiming.

Perhaps you can remember (without me having to find it in one of your earlier posts) what time Raffaele received the goodnight message from his father. Put that on a timeline with the recently revealed computer activity logs. And then tell us where Raffaele's statement is inconsistent with the facts.

The facts are revealing that Amanda and Raffaele both consistently told the truth except for a brief moment when they were led to be confused by the interrogations on the 5th and 6th.

 

[Justinian2]

A covertly hostile group would hide behind an attractive image –like that of Meredith. They would be anonymous and not reveal their true identities. They would be led by a guy that “liked promiscuity, perversion, sadism and irregular sexual practices. He would use children for sadistic purposes.” He would likely fantasize about sex orgies and perverted sex. They would “listen little, mostly to cable, gossip, and lies. They would “cut communications and not relay.” They would be “incapable, capricious and irresponsible”. They would have a “Lack of acceptance of any factual remarks”. They would have a “Tendency to accept all literally. They would have forced humor.” They would “Nullify others to get them to level where they can be used. Devious and vicious means used such as hypnotism, gossip. They seek hidden control”

This is how LRH would describe a criminal group led by a criminal. The guilters would say this is just nonsense. Massei would laugh and say LRH was the criminal.

However, I've got to give the guilters credit. They did come up with a translation of the Massei report and have provided us with many documents and pictures. I'll drink to the help the guilters have given us!

 

[platonov]

Platonov,

Now you know how I feel reading your messages. With respect to your other comment, I am not sure what you mean. Are you referring to #14138 where you say that a phantom interrogation has dropped off the radar? I am not sure, but I suppose you doubt that PM Mignini interrogated Ms. Knox and/or Mr. Sollecito that night. I have two possible inferences from Mr. Mignini's presence: (1) The Perugia police were having such fun playing Chutes and Ladders with Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito that they decided they had better call Mr. Mignini or he would be angry with them for excluding him. (2) Mr. Mignini, like Dr. Giobbi, was there to direct the interrogations, possibly from behind the scenes. I consider one of these inferences to be nonsensical.

Touche !

No, we all know that PM Mignini 'interrogated' Ms. Knox leading to the 5.45 'statement'.

The nonsensical inference was that he also 'interrogated' RS [while he was a 'suspect' but in the absence of legal representation] after the the 5th but before his appearance before Judge Matteini, & that this phantom 'torture session' had been forgotten by all parties and never mentioned again.

ETA What part of On the hypothetical - if things were different they would be different.
is difficult to follow ?

.

 

[Danceme]

Perhaps you can remember (without me having to find it in one of your earlier posts) what time Raffaele received the goodnight message from his father. Put that on a timeline with the recently revealed computer activity logs. And then tell us where Raffaele's statement is inconsistent with the facts.

The facts are revealing that Amanda and Raffaele both consistently told the truth except for a brief moment when they were led to be confused by the interrogations on the 5th and 6th.

If I remember correctly the goodnight message came rather early, but Raffaele didn't get it until the next morning because he had turned his phone off. Feel free to correct me if this is wrong.
However, my post was related to the defence claim that they were on the computer essentially all night, yet Raffaele only describes a little surfing and a movie, then later worries there are no links to other servers. The main point I made was that Raffaele, being a computer scientist, should not have let such a small thing like lack of links to servers worry him when he likely knew there were numerous other ways to prove computer activity.
What are your thoughts on that?

A covertly hostile group would hide behind an attractive image –like that of Meredith. They would be anonymous and not reveal their true identities. They would be led by a guy that “liked promiscuity, perversion, sadism and irregular sexual practices. He would use children for sadistic purposes.” He would likely fantasize about sex orgies and perverted sex. They would “listen little, mostly to cable, gossip, and lies. They would “cut communications and not relay.” They would be “incapable, capricious and irresponsible”. They would have a “Lack of acceptance of any remarks”. They would have a “Tendency to accept all literally avoided by forced humor.” They would “Nullify others to get them to level where they can be used. Devious and vicious means used such as hypnotism, gossip. They seek hidden control”

This is how LRH would describe a criminal group led by a criminal. The guilters would say this is just nonsense. Massei would laugh and say LRH was a criminal.

However, I've got to give the guilters credit. They did come up with a translation of the Massei report and have provided us with many documents and pictures. I'll drink to the help the guilters have given us!

perhaps you're drinking too much Justinian

 

[Withnail1969]

If I remember correctly the goodnight message came rather early, but Raffaele didn't get it until the next morning because he had turned his phone off. Feel free to correct me if this is wrong.

It's a common misconception that it's a known fact that Amanda and Raffaele's phones were turned off. In fact it's unknown whether they were turned off or not.

Edit to add - I was wrong, Amanda did testify to turning her phone off. Noted below.

 

[Danceme]

It's a common misconception that it's a known fact that Amanda and Raffaele's phones were turned off. In fact it's unknown whether they were turned off or not.

Well it's a known fact that Raffaele's phone received a text from his father at around 6:00ish in the morning that was actually sent much earlier the night before. There was no cellular activity on either phone, no pings, nothing, so what do you think?

 

[Danceme]

Also Withnail, I believe Amanda testified to turning her own phone off so she wouldn't be contacted by Patrick, changing his mind about having her come to work.

 

[Withnail1969]

Also Withnail, I believe Amanda testified to turning her own phone off so she wouldn't be contacted by Patrick, changing his mind about having her come to work.

You're correct. I just checked Massei and she did in fact testify she turned off her phone after the message from Patrick.

 

[Danceme]

Found it DanO; his father sent a text at 11:15pm that was received by Raffaele's phone at 6:02am.

 

[Dan O.]

Very good. Now how does the timing of Raffaele receiving the goodnight message correlate with the logs of Raffaele's computer activity. And does it jive with Raffaele's statement of what he did that night (except for your implied timing of how long unspecified activities take).

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Reading back through his diary, two passages describe his computer activity;

"I remember that I surfed the Internet for a bit, maybe I watched a
film and then that you had called me at the house or that anyhow you
sent me a goodnight message."

and,

"My real concerns now are two: one derives from the fact that
if Amanda that night remained all night with me could (and is an
extremely remote possibility) to have made love the whole evening and
night only stopping to eat ... A fine mess because there are no links
to other servers in those hours on my computer ."

What I find amazing about this is that last line. Raffaele is a computer scientist. Wouldn't he have the knowledge to say he doesn't need to worry because it is not the fact that there are no links to other servers that proves anything, there would be logs of all sorts that will prove he was on his computer. Just worrying about links to servers is something that someone unknowledgeable in computers might think but not someone who studies the subject and knows such logs exist and are retreivable.

The first quote doesn't even come close to describing a night mainly spent on the computer till all hours of the morning as the defence is claiming.

I own and use a Mac, I consider myself computer literate, and I had no idea that a log like the one the defence has unearthed existed on my machines.

As far as I was aware, unless I was connecting to the internet or modifying files there would be no evidence left on my computer after I turned it off with regard to exactly what I had been doing or that I had done it at all, and in any case the metadata for any files I accessed could in theory be falsified anyway so it wouldn't necessarily prove anything.

(The reason the Stardust metadata proves something interesting it that it was altered while the machine was in police custody, indicating at best incompetent browsing about before the machine was backed up, and at worst an active attempt to destroy evidence that would have exonerated Raffaele and Amanda).

If I'd known, I'd have been asking a very long time ago "Hey, what about the log file on Raffaele's computer, it's a Mac like mine, it should have a log file!".

Computer science students don't necessarily spend any time on computer forensics as far as I'm aware, so just because Raffaele was studying how to write code doesn't necessarily mean he knew a lot about the fiddly details of Unix operating systems.

 

[platonov]

A covertly hostile group would hide behind an attractive image –like that of Meredith. They would be anonymous and not reveal their true identities. They would be led by a guy that “liked promiscuity, perversion, sadism and irregular sexual practices. He would use children for sadistic purposes.” He would likely fantasize about sex orgies and perverted sex. They would “listen little, mostly to cable, gossip, and lies. They would “cut communications and not relay.” They would be “incapable, capricious and irresponsible”. They would have a “Lack of acceptance of any factual remarks”. They would have a “Tendency to accept all literally. They would have forced humor.” They would “Nullify others to get them to level where they can be used. Devious and vicious means used such as hypnotism, gossip. They seek hidden control”

This is how LRH would describe a criminal group led by a criminal. The guilters would say this is just nonsense. Massei would laugh and say LRH was the criminal.

However, I've got to give the guilters credit. They did come up with a translation of the Massei report and have provided us with many documents and pictures. I'll drink to the help the guilters have given us!

So who is the 'evil leader' in this case - Massei ?? are we are his dupes??

Thats twice I've been duped now - last time it was by an OT group.

Is this the tyranny of evil men ...... and you are the righteous man OR am I mixing up belief systems again.

I'm trying real hard to be the sheep that follows the evidence but man, its dark in the valley and there all talking Italian.

OT = Off Topic (any other meanings are purely coincidental)

.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

What's this 'guilter' thing ...... so there is lots of superfluous internet comment on the case ?

Perhaps I misunderstood your statement that much of the pro-Amanda internet comment was driven by, among other things, the fact that she was white.

I wasn't aware of any participants in this drama other than Lumumba and Guede who were non-white, nor am I aware of any pro-innocence commentators who believe Lumumba to be anything other than the victim of police incompetence, malice and racism. That seems by a process of elimination to mean that you were implying that a significant part of pro-Amanda internet commentary was driven by racism directed at Rudy Guede, the rapist and murderer whose character the anti-Amanda commentating community often attempts to defend.

Big deal, that's not what convicted all 3, despite 'innocentsi' talking points*/claims to the contrary.
*the ridiculous cartwheel argument which started this [since renamed] thread for example.

They were convicted on the evidence as presented in court. [televised legal maneuvering notwithstanding].

You keep repeating this as if you think it has some argumentative merit.

I am surprised that it has escaped your attention up to this point that we do not think their conviction was well-founded, but maybe this fact temporarily slipped your mind. What makes you think that the opinion of the court has any weight here? A Perugia court could say that up is down if it wanted, but we'd laugh at it rather than taking its pronouncement the least bit seriously.