Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Mary_H]

'Juicing' is slang for injecting or otherwise abusing steroids (source - 'Fight Club').

Could this mean creating a giant and extremely strong adult pig with repeated doses and heavy workouts?

Ah, you seem to know a great deal more than I do about this subject. All I could think of was the movie Babe.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Simple, no matter what her involvement was, she didn't think she would get caught.

Your original question was, "If she had no involvement in this case except being in the house when the body was discovered why would she be worried about not being about to continuing to study in Perugia? RS seemed to have no problem with her staying with him."

The same question could be asked if she didn't think she would be caught, so perhaps you should answer it yourself. My concern is more basic: even if she didn't think she would get caught, she would know that she was putting herself into a terrible situation. Why would she do that? Why would she disrupt an arrangement that was going so well? She had just met a new Italian boyfriend, as of 8:40 they were comfortably ensconced at his apartment, it was a quiet evening, she didn't have to work, and they had a trip planned for the next day... but at some point, the tone completely changed. They went out on the town, hooked up with a guy they barely knew, and committed murder.

If your method is to examine what Amanda said and wrote, and subject it to a test of logic and reasoning, shouldn't you apply the same test to your overall theory as to what happened?

 

[Withnail1969]

Well, i'd personally rate murder as a serious offence. As such I don't think that murder suspects should have the option of house arrest.


Sure, and what guarantee that they would actually stay in Italy?

How would Amanda or the rest of the family escape Italy if her family took a flat in Perugia and guaranteed she wouldn't abscond? Do you think they might have some issues at the airport maybe?

Like, 'Name'? 'Knox'

'Wait a minute, that rings a bell somewhere'...

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)
We've been thorough this. Regardless of whether the interrogation was coercive, he said something different during the interrogation from what he had said before or would say after. Maybe the police promised him a lollipop if he would change his story.

I base myself on what he said before and after. These parts conflict with his computer records and with other findings. For the rest, I base myself on his decision to not retract not credible/conflicting things he said during the interrogation. He said he didn't remember if he had sex. He said he doesn't remember what he did, he told the press he was at a party, he said and wrote he was not sure if Amanda was with him, he said Amanda induced him to tell a load of crap, he said he was drugged up and high like a newspaper kiosk, Amanda said he was sleeping when she woke up at 10:30 after a long sleep. And also, i note he decides not to address any coercion, doesn't feel the need to retract his interrogation - saying things like "I retract because I rendered them against my will" - on the contrary, even states he expressed himself well enough as to not need any further meeting with the magistrate; since he did not claim coercion, on the absence of this claim and of any fact certainly I would never assume coercion being a judge. Never, no way. A judge can't do such a reasoning by his initiative. And even if there was coercion during police interrogation, this is irrelevant given that I am based on his statements as released to a judge and as written by himself.

 

[Chris C]

The defense brief included something about the logs proving continuous activity all night with a maximum of six minute intervals. I still don't know what that means. I made a joke about it being possible the longest Raffaele could last with Amanda was five minutes, so that might be the first mention of that specific time period.

Can anyone clear up for us exactly what the defense is implying here? We had that six minute thing, then the 12 hours of whatever it was, and then the 'hot corners' and now I'm lost again.

Did the defense claim all night or all night during the specified ToD of Meredith. The first time I read the translation. It read like they was suggesting that there was computer activity during the entire time period of Meredith's possible ToD. Which included Mignini's crazy TOD.

 

[quadraginta]

That is highly likely. I'm still trying to figure out what juicing the piglet means.

'Juicing' is slang for injecting or otherwise abusing steroids (source - 'Fight Club').

Could this mean creating a giant and extremely strong adult pig with repeated doses and heavy workouts?

A superficial and cursory examination of the topic using Google suggests that the only known employment of the phrase "juicing the piglet" is in relatively obscure corners of a message board known as JREF.

Actual meaning may be problematic. Or even irrelevant.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Chicago Tribune

Indeed but tastes vary as we have already established upthread.

But leaving aside varying journalistic standards is it not the case that both C Dempsey & Frank S are merely opportunistic hacks* who built blogs, and in Dempsey's case, sold a book on the back of a sordid murder.

* this is probably too kind - were either working journo's at the time ?

Which makes it all the more surprising the esteem in which their partisan opinions are held by the 'innocentsi' - To the extent that when I, on my entry into this thread, asked a straightforward Q regarding AK's testimony I was fobbed off with their opinions as opposed to the actual testimony. ??

Tastes vary indeed.

.

Platonov,

You are ignoring the fact that Ms. Dempsey has been a journalist for about thirty years. She worked for The Chicago Tribune (go Cubs!), and she has written a number of business articles and won a number of awards. It was Ms. Nadeau who chose to title her book Angel Face, a title even she acknowledges as provocative.

 

[Chris C]

Well what would do Mary, if your roommate had be brutally murdered in your own home? I'd be freaking out, wondering if maybe he (or them) were actually after me. I'd be on the first plane home.

Yep, kinda like how Rudy headed home.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

precautionary detention

Well, i'd personally rate murder as a serious offence. As such I don't think that murder suspects should have the option of house arrest.


Sure, and what guarantee that they would actually stay in Italy?

Amazer,

You misunderstood my question. Between November of 2007 and October of 2008, neither Raffaele nor Amanda had been formally charged. Therefore, calling him a suspect is not quite right, IMHO. This is the period of time at issue in Mr. Sayagh's manuscript.

 

[Mary_H]

I base myself on what he said before and after. These parts conflict with his computer records and with other findings. For the rest, I base myself on his decision to not retract not credible/conflicting things he said during the interrogation. He said he didn't remember if he had sex. He said he doesn't remember what he did, he told the press he was at a party, he said and wrote he was not sure if Amanda was with him, he said Amanda induced him to tell a load of crap, he said he was drugged up and high like a newspaper kiosk, Amanda said he was sleeping when she woke up at 10:30 after a long sleep. And also, i note he decides not to address any coercion, doesn't feel the need to retract his interrogation - saying things like "I retract because I rendered them against my will" - on the contrary, even states he expressed himself well enough as to not need any further meeting with the magistrate; since he did not claim coercion, on the absence of this claim and of any fact certainly I would never assume coercion being a judge. Never, no way. A judge can't do such a reasoning by his initiative. And even if there was coercion during police interrogation, this is irrelevant given that I am based on his statements as released to a judge and as written by himself.

This is a lot more claims about possibly factual but mostly disputable details and events than you usually make. What's come over you?

People can be coerced without realizing it. If the only means the police needed to get Raffaele to change his story or validate theirs was lying, then Raffaele would have no awareness at the time that he was being manipulated. You can see in his diary how he changes his mind about Amanda over the course of a few days away from the police influencing his thoughts. If we were to ask Raffaele today whether he was coerced during his interrogation, we would surely get a different answer from the one he gave the GIP.

You say you base yourself on what Raffaele said before and after, but it appears to me that at a certain point in Raffele's diary and other statements, you stop basing yourself on what Raffaele said and start basing yourself on what you choose to believe.

 

[Machiavelli]

To all,

As weak as the grounds for holding Amanda without charge were (given the other options available), they are even weaker for Raffaele. Can anyone contend that he was a flight risk?

He is obviously at flight risk. He is exactly in the same situation as Ludwig, an Italian serial killer. Anyone who risks a very high penalty and has not confessed is considered at flight rist. In addition Sollecito is surrounded by a family who acitively conspired with illicit means against the investigation, he has a lot of money, is the son of a masonic leader in South Italy with capability of move a network at his disposal, and posseses firearms as well as the custom of walking around with weapons.

 

[Chris C]

The alleged EU Human Rights violation of incarceration without charges is an issue which stands separate from the question of their guilt or innocence. Why would the resolution of this trial be germane? If they were confined improperly then they were confined improperly.

They where both improperly confined because most of the evidence that was presented against them for confinement was proven false before the trial. At that point they should have been released or had another confinement hearing. If they didn't get a new confinement hearing then they was improperly confined.

 

[Withnail1969]

He is obviously at flight risk. He is exactly in the same situation as Ludwig, an Italian serial killer. Anyone who risks a very high penalty and has not confessed is considered at flight rist. In addition Sollecito is surrounded by a family who acitively conspired with illicit means against the investigation, he has a lot of money, is the son of a masonic leader in South Italy with capability of move a network at his disposal, and posseses firearms as well as the custom of walking around with weapons.

Isn't this a ludicrous distortion of the facts? Mr Sollecito senior is a highly respected doctor, while Vanessa Sollecito was an extremely high flying Carabinieri officer. Your statement is a vile slander against the Sollecito family.

 

[Chris C]

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

So then all the "Internet diagnosis" done by the guilters or those that have never met Amanda should also be labeled as a JOKE.

 

[Chris C]

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

I dont think she had anything to do with this murder or knows anything about it. However, sorry dude, I wouldn't want knox anywhere near my daughter. I wouldn't want her shacking up with some dude while she is attending college, wouldn't want her smoking pot and I surely wouldn't want my son knocking up some girl that smokes pot.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)

People can be coerced without realizing it. If the only means the police needed to get Raffaele to change his story or validate theirs was lying, then Raffaele would have no awareness at the time that he was being manipulated. You can see in his diary how he changes his mind about Amanda over the course of a few days away from the police influencing his thoughts. If we were to ask Raffaele today whether he was coerced during his interrogation, we would surely get a different answer from the one he gave the GIP.

You say you base yourself on what Raffaele said before and after, but it appears to me that at a certain point in Raffele's diary and other statements, you stop basing yourself on what Raffaele said and start basing yourself on what you choose to believe.

Raffaele doesn't state he was coerced and certainly doesn't realize it, but above all, the problem is anyway he doesn't correct the points where he was lying.
You see, then if people are coerced without realizing it, they better realize it later at a certain point, because he is responsible for what he says. "If we were to ask today" is a question with no answer, he was not asked today and didn't make this claim titll today: he had specific opportunity to make all pleas and statements as he wanted to do. On the current state of things, nobody can assume or hipothesyze he was coerced: certainly no judge ever will do it. And, in any case, nobody will ever explain his conflicting alibi with coercion, since his statements are all in documents like the judge interrogation, writings, defensive position, in which there was no coercion and for which he - and only he - bears responsability.

 

[Machiavelli]

Isn't this a ludicrous distortion of the facts? Mr Sollecito senior is a highly respected doctor, while Vanessa Sollecito was an extremely high flying Carabinieri officer. Your statement is a vile slander against the Sollecito family.

Do you know why Vanessa isn't a Carabiniere any more?
And in what does the slander consist?
What I report, is simply the judge's position.

 

[Withnail1969]

Do you know why Vanessa isn't a Carabiniere any more?
And in what does the slander consist?
What I report, is simply the judge's position.

I'm sure you enjoy hiding behind the judge's statements.

I think Vanessa tried to help her brother and fell into the web of the spider Mignini. I heard she was trying to get her job back, I'm not sure what's happening there.

 

[Mary_H]

Raffaele doesn't state he was coerced and certainly doesn't realize it, but above all, the problem is anyway he doesn't correct the points where he was lying.
You see, then if people are coerced without realizing it, they better realize it later at a certain point, because he is responsible for what he says. "If we were to ask today" is a question with no answer, he was not asked today and didn't make this claim titll today: he had specific opportunity to make all pleas and statements as he wanted to do. On the current state of things, nobody can assume or hipothesyze he was coerced: certainly no judge ever will do it. And, in any case, nobody will ever explain his conflicting alibi with coercion, since his statements are all in documents like the judge interrogation, writings, defensive position, in which there was no coercion and for which he - and only he - bears responsability.

Coercion is a side issue. I should have left well enough alone, since I already know that you believe that Raffaele's statement that the police tortured him psychologically does not actually mean that the police tortured him psychologically.

I'll return to your claim that you are basing your position on Raffaele's interrogation, writings, statements, diary, defense, etc. At no point in any of this documentation does Raffaele ever give any direct indication of any kind of involvement in the murder. What entitles you, then, to reinterpret his words as expressions of guilt, when that is clearly not his intention?

 

[Mary_H]

He is obviously at flight risk. He is exactly in the same situation as Ludwig, an Italian serial killer. Anyone who risks a very high penalty and has not confessed is considered at flight rist. In addition Sollecito is surrounded by a family who acitively conspired with illicit means against the investigation, he has a lot of money, is the son of a masonic leader in South Italy with capability of move a network at his disposal, and posseses firearms as well as the custom of walking around with weapons.

Why did Dr. Sollecito not move the network that was at his disposal to get Raffaele out of prison?