Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
TomCH said:
Well, I think it fair to say that RS and AK will be treated equally, as they were the first time around, and since there has been no such hype on the part of RS's family in the Italian (or other) media, one can but conclude that the US hype also will have no bearing on the case.

Or do you think RS will get off, as he is Italian, and AK will get life, as she is American?
Click to expand...

No, I have seen some suggest that. My opinion is that their fates are intertwined on this. I have been concerned with the media treatment in Italy with the Sarah Scazzi case. Maybe you could give me your insight on that one.
 
What are they thinking.

TomCH said:
TV interviews, etc.

Want justice, hire some good lawyers, and stop trying to influence the courts via the media, especially that of another country (i.e. the US). Italian courts REALLY don't care about what people in the US think!

(Nor do they care what people on Internet forums think)
Click to expand...


So the 9.05 ToD , Wiki links to other cases, the bathroom hokey-cokey, Wiki links to other cases, rambling tales of false rape claims, Wiki links to other cases, she's not the type, Wiki links to other cases, statistical analysis showing more evidence = weaker case, Wiki links to other cases, it was the Sun wot' done it, Wiki links to other cases, Comodi's lies & retrocausality, Wiki links to other cases, Its all a hoax, Wiki links to other cases, Its all a conspiracy, Wiki links to other cases, It sounds to me like a false internalized confession, Wiki links to other cases, Leave Amanda alone, Wiki links to other cases, I don't like those people on PMF, Wiki links to other cases etc etc etc
aren't being entered into evidence by the defence...........several times over.

The fools. What are they thinking.

.
 
Last edited:
let's talk about the electropherograms

platonov,

What do you think of Charlie's comment and electropherogram? Do you think that Dr. Hampikian is correct?
 
TomCH said:
Hardly.

It is an act of faith, and perhaps even fact, but until the fact has been proven, it is NOT beyond debate.

That they have been convicted, IS, however, a fact beyond debate.
Click to expand...

The only meritorious arguments, perhaps, are with the authenticity and significance of facts.

Arguments will emerge as the appeal goes on.
 
TomCH said:
Well, I think it fair to say that RS and AK will be treated equally, as they were the first time around, and since there has been no such hype on the part of RS's family in the Italian (or other) media, one can but conclude that the US hype also will have no bearing on the case.

Or do you think RS will get off, as he is Italian, and AK will get life, as she is American?
Click to expand...

Hype:
1: put on, deceive
2: to promote or publicize extravagantly <hyping this fall's TV lineup>


Tabloids talking about cartwheels, sex orgies, foxy knoxy, and other sensationalism define hype by my definition.

Newspapers talking about facts on behalf of an innocent person are not publishing hype, but are respectable.

Anyway, in the USA tabloids are frequently associated with trash reporting.

I would hope that publishing fact certainly does effect all court systems and governments; it's the very cornerstone of the American government and society. Beats war, bombs, missiles and bullets.
 
Last edited:
RoseMontague said:
No, I have seen some suggest that. My opinion is that their fates are intertwined on this. I have been concerned with the media treatment in Italy with the Sarah Scazzi case. Maybe you could give me your insight on that one.
Click to expand...

I agree. I haven't seen anything which indicates that Raffaele and Amanda are to go their separate ways at trial.

As for the media treatement in the Scazzi case, I still find it difficult to fathom the information concerning her daughter's death was relayed to her via live television, even if she gave permission to do so because what parent is logically thinking when their daughter has been missing for a time?

For all - Frank has a new post up.
 
RoseMontague said:
No, I have seen some suggest that. My opinion is that their fates are intertwined on this. I have been concerned with the media treatment in Italy with the Sarah Scazzi case. Maybe you could give me your insight on that one.
Click to expand...
Based on the evidence presented so far, Sabrina did it, and Michele covered it up.

Not sure where the mother fits in, if at all.

Pretty awful for Sarah's mother to find out as she did, though. "Chi L'ha Visto" really screwed that up.
 
There was only one goal in the meredith kercher murder investigation from as early as November2/3 and that was to prosecute and convict Amanda knox and Raffaele sollecito,the evidence against Rudy Guede jumped out at them in such a way as to make not prosecuting him also, impossible

There was only one reason for not testing the two possible semen stains on the pillow case and the material under Meridiths nails,and that was Mignini feared the effect that the results would have on his goal to convict Amanda and Raffaele

What did Mignini know or fear about them two pieces of evidence that made it to risky to test them
 
platonov said:
So the 9.05 ToD , Wiki links to other cases, the bathroom hokey-cokey, Wiki links to other cases, rambling tales of false rape claims, Wiki links to other cases, she's not the type, Wiki links to other cases, statistical analysis showing more evidence = weaker case, Wiki links to other cases, it was the Sun wot' done it, Wiki links to other cases, Comodi's lies & retrocausality, Wiki links to other cases, Its all a hoax, Wiki links to other cases, Its all a conspiracy, Wiki links to other cases, It sounds to me like a false internalized confession, Wiki links to other cases, Leave Amanda alone, Wiki links to other cases, I don't like those people on PMF, Wiki links to other cases etc etc etc
aren't being entered into evidence by the defence...........several times over.

The fools. What are they thinking.

.
Click to expand...
What's the point of this post? All I see you posting is dismissal of what others have posted. Do you not have anything of substance about the case to add?

And, by the way, even though you (and others) keep attempting to ridicule ToD arguments by saying ridiculous times such as "9.05", the simple fact remains that neither you nor anyone else has engaged in anything resembling a decent debate on this matter. Equating the autopsy findings with a ToD any later than 10.00pm is laughable, and a ToD later than 9.30 is very improbable. And I think you probably know that. Unless you've actually got anything to argue against it....?
 
Last edited:
TomCH said:
Based on the evidence presented so far, Sabrina did it, and Michele covered it up.

Not sure where the mother fits in, if at all.

Pretty awful for Sarah's mother to find out as she did, though. "Chi L'ha Visto" really screwed that up.
Click to expand...

It seems most of Italy has a similar Sabrina is guilty assumption. I see a lot of similarities with the early feelings about Amanda and I have a lot of doubt about the evidence against her. I guess we will see what happens next in this one.
 
Hype

TomCH said:
Yes, I agree with your definitions.

A very good description of the US media's coverage of the case.
Click to expand...

TomCH,

It is a very good description of how ILE handled the case. To take but a single example, putting out the photograph of the bathroom looking all red. People naturally assumed it was blood, and that Amanda lied about not noticing it. I am sure some of the commenters here could find more examples, if people were so inclined to talk about it.
 
Well, the Discovery Channel documentary has made an unpromising start - it's stated as fact the postal police arriving at 12.30pm, and has not questioned the "staging" of the break-in. Andrea Vogt is their main interviewee. If she's also their main journalistic source, it looks like she doesn't know the case very well at all....
 
TomCH said:
Based on the evidence presented so far, Sabrina did it, and Michele covered it up.

Not sure where the mother fits in, if at all.

Pretty awful for Sarah's mother to find out as she did, though. "Chi L'ha Visto" really screwed that up.
Click to expand...

Can I ask what evidence in particular has convinced you so far? (apart from Michele's declarations, of course!)
 
christianahannah said:
I agree. I haven't seen anything which indicates that Raffaele and Amanda are to go their separate ways at trial.

As for the media treatement in the Scazzi case, I still find it difficult to fathom the information concerning her daughter's death was relayed to her via live television, even if she gave permission to do so because what parent is logically thinking when their daughter has been missing for a time?

For all - Frank has a new post up.
Click to expand...

Frank makes the first hearing interesting even if it was just for scheduling. Thanks for the heads up.
 
TomCH said:
Yes, I agree with your definitions.

A very good description of the US media's coverage of the case.
Click to expand...

Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of the American way of life.
John Quincy Adams championed freedom of speech for years.

Adams, John Quincy (1767-1848)
sixth president of the United States (1825-1829), who combined brilliant statesmanship with skilful diplomacy. As Secretary of State (1817-1825) he ranks among the ablest holders of the office, and he played a major role in formulating American foreign policy. As an eight-term member of the House of Representatives (1831-1848) he was a leading defender of freedom of speech and a spokesman for the antislavery cause.
Click to expand...

Did you notice that he was an eight-term member of the House of Representatives AFTER being president?
 
Last edited:
Re: lets talk about - No

halides1 said:
platonov,

What do you think of Charlie's comment and electropherogram? Do you think that Dr. Hampikian is correct?
Click to expand...

I have absolutely no idea.

That's what's known in my world as a straight answer.

But a few comments \ questions.
How accurate is the quote and [what's the full context] from Darkness Descending.
How accurate were the authors of DD in getting across Garofano point*. - I see he is also credited.
Was this point entered into evidence in court - ie what's the relevance.

I could [but wont] do some googleing to find an 'answer' but I would need to be very confident before I would call Garfano or Hampikian an idiot.
However the 'honesty' or emphasis of experts when off the stand [and sometimes even when on] may be a different matter.

I also fail to see how your comment in that post about dating DNA is relevant - it seems strawmanish.

*On this point I find complex issues are often simplified and distorted in the media and popular works.

.
 
Last edited:
Ahh I see the new paradigm is that "bus schedules and screensavers" are all that Knox and Sollecito have in their favour for the appeal. What an interesting (and intellectually bankrupt) attempt to rationalise the safety of the convictions.
 
Well, the Discovery Channel programme was incredibly curious. It could essentially have been made a year ago. It has zero editorial stance or opinion on the case. And the narrator pronounces Sollecito's name as "soll-eh-SHITT-oh" :(

Still, at least the first Ashes test starts in an hour :)
 
LondonJohn said:
What's the point of this post? All I see you posting is dismissal of what others have posted. Do you not have anything of substance about the case to add?

And, by the way, even though you (and others) keep attempting to ridicule ToD arguments by saying ridiculous times such as "9.05", the simple fact remains that neither you nor anyone else has engaged in anything resembling a decent debate on this matter. Equating the autopsy findings with a ToD any later than 10.00pm is laughable, and a ToD later than 9.30 is very improbable. And I think you probably know that. Unless you've actually got anything to argue against it....?
Click to expand...


How very dare you :):)

I do - I like to think I helped sort out the interminable 'internalized false confession' argument among other things - but the inability to get straight answers on that issue led me to question the wisdom of the exercise as a whole.

In any case most issues [and they are reasonably straightforward ] have been previously addressed at length by other posters but to no avail.
I am merely stress testing the some of the innocentsi 'arguments' and providing advice and overview. Where's the gratitude :confused:

As to the 9.05 or 9.30 ToD - these arguments have received (several times) all the treatment (and more) necessary to dispose of them.

They are in fact, under the circumstances of this debate , quite completely ....unpersuasive.

ETA I assume, for example, you have taken my point about new alibis/Macavity on board and future arguments wont fall foul of this obvious error.

.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom