Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Mary_H]

'Footprints on bathmats and bloodstains on bidets...

These are a few of my favourite things...'

You guys are gonna get us busted!

 

[Justinian2]

You can prove no such thing. Amanda may be 100% mentally healthy, she may not. Your "Internet diagnosis" is a joke.

OK, I'll admit my word prove was wrong. However, the attempt by any to prove that Amanda had a PD that predisposed her to anything bad is just as wrong. I was trying to counter this by having people agree to a list of social characteristics such as frequently kind, usually patient, usually friendly, usually trusting, usually honest, usually interested in sex, usually healthy, usually bathed and clean, usually well dressed, usually conscientious with homework, usually patient around children.
I find that DSM III R to be defective in that a list of social characteristics is missing. Perhaps I just cannot find it in my hard copy. A search of a hard copy is more difficult than an electronic search. Perhaps I'll buy and electronic copy.

Is my "Internet diagnosis" a joke? I am asking others to provide a list of social characteristics. Is that a joke? Is it a joke to think that some have lived their lives better than others? Is it a joke to think that Massei in not an example that I would wish my children emulated. Is it a joke to think highly of Amanda and the Knox family (with the presumption of innocence).

Was Amanda too naive and too trusting with her male friends?
Perhaps, but I find that naivety is usually a good characteristic - unless you are investing money or dating a serial killer.

Was Amanda evil because she had sex with six partners?
No. Experimentation isn't a bad thing.

I would be happy with her as my daughter's roomate or my son's wife/girlfriend.

 

[RoseMontague]

'Footprints on bathmats and bloodstains on bidets...

These are a few of my favourite things...'

That is sooooooo funny. LOL.

My favorite nun was Mary Tyler Moore played with some obscure singer.

 

[Mary_H]

I am referring to their whole position - the whole set of what they claim. What they told to the police, what they told to judges, and decisions to not declare and to not change things they said. This is also including Raffaele's decision to decline the interrogation with the magistrate to which he was entitled to, on the grounds (defence position) that Sollecito "had cleared completely his recolletion of facts". What he said was the best expression of his truth: by the defence this was his position.
In additin, I also consider Sollecito's diary.

I am not quite following you, although that's nothing new. I thought you said Amanda was the one who declined the interrogation with the magistrate. What is the interrogation to which you are now referring?

Looking at the big picture, as you seem to want to do, it is clear that Amanda and Raffaele had matching alibis, which changed only in the presence of the police, then reverted to the originals. Raffaele's diary, of all things, makes it clear he is innocent.

 

[christianahannah]

Oh noes! Three years in a convent and she probably would have become a nun and then Justianian2 would have a total freak out.

I guess house arrest in a convent in Italy isn't totally unbelievable but really, is that much better than prison?

This link from the U.S. Embassy gives some information about "house arrest." It seems to agree with Chris's response.

Prisoners awaiting trial (or, if already convicted, awaiting the outcome of an appeal) are sometimes conditionally released (rimessione in libertà). The granting of a conditional release is completely at the discretion of the responsible judge. Conditional release generally will not be granted in the case of a prisoner deemed likely to commit another crime if released while awaiting trial, or if the charges are particularly serious. When granting a conditional release, the judge can limit the movement of the accused by ordering him/her to remain in Italy, to not reside in a certain area, or to stay in a hospital or other facility.

http://italy.usembassy.gov/acs/emergency/emergency-arrest.html

 

[platonov]

I shall demur from availing myself of the many comedic opportunities this factoid lends itself to, but I do sincerely want to thank you for the conjectures it provokes.

Title for a Knox movie. The Trouble with Angel Faces.

Given the apparent tastes of RS ..perhaps 'Two mules for Sister Sara'

.

 

[tsig]

I don't believe you are addressing the argument that I made. Amanda looks like a snorer. I bet Raffaele kicks. katy_did made a good point as well. The type of settings for the screensaver might help, any movement or mouse, etc.

Because Occam razor no longer applies to this thread?

If it ever did.

Occams' razor? More like a carryall.

 

[Alt+F4]

Perhaps they don't take those Human Rights declarations very seriously then. Kinda like the vast majority of the world and the UN.

I think there are two issues here:

1. What is Italian case law and the European Convention say about house arrest as an option for a non-EU citizen who has no home or family in the country in question?

2. According to the paper in question, according to the European Court a person can be held if there is the belief they will flee. From that paper:

Detention to prevent a suspect from absconding must also be based upon objective evidence.

The Court has stated that a court ordering such detention must consider all possible alternatives before ordering detentionand that any detention must be based upon a number of factors such as: the ease of leaving the jurisdiction, the seriousness of the potential sentence, the lack of domestic ties, the character of the person involved, his home, his occupation, his assets and family ties. The court requires that these factors demonstrate circumstances “genuinely tending to establish the risk of absconding.

Based on that, I think there was justification that Amanda might flee. She was facing a serious sentence, she had no family, work or financial ties to Italy and it wouldn't be that difficult to escape.​

In regard to Amanda possibly being a flight risk that paper also says:​

Similarly, Amanda was deemed a flight risk simply because she is an American citizen.

The court could easily have reduced the risk of actual flight by taking Amanda’s passport away from her, and perhaps asking for extradition assurances from the American embassy.

Did the court deem her a flight risk? What is the legal procedure for "taking away" a person's passport? The last part was the most strange. There is already an extradition treaty between the United States and Italy. Why would an additional assurance be needed? On what legal grounds?​

​

 

[Alt+F4]

Is my "Internet diagnosis" a joke? I am asking others to provide a list of social characteristics. Is that a joke? Is it a joke to think that some have lived their lives better than others? Is it a joke to think that Massei in not an example that I would wish my children emulated. Is it a joke to think highly of Amanda and the Knox family (with the presumption of innocence).

I think it's a joke that you think you know more about Amanda Knox above what has been said about her in the media, whether it was negative or positive.

 

[Mary_H]

I think it's a joke that you think you know more about Amanda Knox above what has been said about her in the media, whether it was negative or positive.

Do you think the same thing about treehorn?

 

[Mary_H]

I think there are two issues here:

1. What is Italian case law and the European Convention say about house arrest as an option for a non-EU citizen who has no home or family in the country in question?

2. According to the paper in question, according to the European Court a person can be held if there is the belief they will flee. From that paper:

Based on that, I think there was justification that Amanda might flee. She was facing a serious sentence, she had no family, work or financial ties to Italy and it wouldn't be that difficult to escape.​

In regard to Amanda possibly being a flight risk that paper also says:​

Did the court deem her a flight risk? What is the legal procedure for "taking away" a person's passport? The last part was the most strange. There is already an extradition treaty between the United States and Italy. Why would an additional assurance be needed? On what legal grounds?​

​

I believe Amanda was deemed a flight risk. It is possible no one has appealed to the EU yet on her behalf.

 

[Alt+F4]

Prisoners awaiting trial (or, if already convicted, awaiting the outcome of an appeal) are sometimes conditionally released (rimessione in libertà). The granting of a conditional release is completely at the discretion of the responsible judge. Conditional release generally will not be granted in the case of a prisoner deemed likely to commit another crime if released while awaiting trial, or if the charges are particularly serious. When granting a conditional release, the judge can limit the movement of the accused by ordering him/her to remain in Italy, to not reside in a certain area, or to stay in a hospital or other facility.

Well certainly the eventual charges in this case were particularly serious. However, she wasn't offically charged with murder during this year long precautionary detention, so I'm not sure what you posted applies.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Charlie do you know what quantification and control data have not been turned over?

According to the motivations the defense asked that the trial be suspended and this information be turned over to them. The court ordered the suspension of the trial and for the prosecution to turn over the documentation asked for by the defense. Upon resumption of testimony the defense experts still complained about not receiving some documentation but I am not sure what they were speaking of.

I don't know exactly what they have requested, and it is very technical. They want to thoroughly examine the quality of the work done in this lab.

 

[Alt+F4]

I believe Amanda was deemed a flight risk. It is possible no one has appealed to the EU yet on her behalf.

She had no family, job, money, or home in Italy. She had few personal possessions. She was facing the possibility of a life sentence. Is it that unreasonable to believe she might flee?

 

[Alt+F4]

Do you think the same thing about treehorn?

I'm sorry, I must have missed that post. Could you link to it? Thanks.

 

[RoseMontague]

Originally Posted by RoseMontague View Post
I don't believe you are addressing the argument that I made. Amanda looks like a snorer. I bet Raffaele kicks. katy_did made a good point as well. The type of settings for the screensaver might help, any movement or mouse, etc.

Originally Posted by odeed View Post
Because Occam razor no longer applies to this thread?

If it ever did.

Occams' razor? More like a carryall.

Maybe I should have said DiMaggio?

 

[quadraginta]

Well certainly the eventual charges in this case were particularly serious. However, she wasn't offically charged with murder during this year long precautionary detention, so I'm not sure what you posted applies.

It's a Vast International Conspiracy. The evidence is indisputable.

How else does one explain the willful refusal of officials at the highest levels of power on continents around the world to execute their sworn duties? There can be no other explanation.

The sinister influences and overwhelming power of the Perugia Police Mafia cannot be eluded by mere national governments and international alliances.

 

[christianahannah]

I don't know exactly what they have requested, and it is very technical. They want to thoroughly examine the quality of the work done in this lab.

This is part of Amanda's appeal, correct? Do you also know if there were any additional documents filed by her defense before the November 9 cutoff date?

 

[Machiavelli]

I am not quite following you, although that's nothing new. I thought you said Amanda was the one who declined the interrogation with the magistrate. What is the interrogation to which you are now referring?
(..)

Amanda refused to answer to the GIP (the preliminary judge) but she was there. Then she decided to clear her position in an interrogation with Mignini (the magistrate) on Dec 18.
Raffaele decided to speak with the GIP, but he didn't want to be interrogated by Mignini (not that he just refused to answer: he declined the interrogation) and he expressed the reason why: because he had already clarified his position and thus didn't have anything different to add after what he said.
Everything he said outside the police interrogation - in the GIP interogation, in his diaries, in his statements about having clarified everything - is incompabible wit an alibi of being awake at the computer the whole night.
And, about assuming coercive interrogations, where is the claim he underwent a coercive interogation? There is no claim of this, no fact explaining coercion was claimed by his defence or reported by him, and there is not even a claim - by him or by the defence - that these facts about his alibi he reported in any of those in interrgations were false.

 

[RoseMontague]

It's a Vast International Conspiracy. The evidence is indisputable.

How else does one explain the willful refusal of officials at the highest levels of power on continents around the world to execute their sworn duties? There can be no other explanation.

The sinister influences and overwhelming power of the Perugia Police Mafia cannot be eluded by mere national governments and international alliances.

It probably goes beyond even that reaching as far as the desk of the Chairman and CEO of Exxon/Mobil.