Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

Sorry, Truethat. It is Miss Represented by Dr. Covington. " The lies our Mothers told us",

Miss Represented quotes Dr. Covington but it is not a blog by Dr. Covington. I doubt that the owner of this blog is a psychologist or a doctor of anything. The only decent article I saw from this place from earlier this year was removed.

BTW, he/she makes a comment that PMF and TJMK are really the only two tolerant blogs discussing this case. Go figure.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I think, instead, that in my reasoning there is no need of any assumption of any absolute quantificator. None ot the assumptions needs to be sure, nor proven, nor show something as not possible.
I don't have to assume both those premises in order to may my points. I don't have to assume any of those points as absolutely certain.

Sure but it would be nice if you presented a scenario that have some plausibility. It would be nice if it was comprehensive enough to explain Meredith's strange phone logs. Or how they cleaned their DNA and traces, yet left Rudy's visible shoeprints intact. Or why they left Rudy's feces and pointed it out to the police, only to accuse Lumumba next. As you see we cannot escape the big picture

Your claims that the front window is not illuminated or that the choice of entrance is logical is absurd, as well as that the climbing won't leave any trace or that sweters would normally fall under paper bags containing the rock, these are simply absurd in reality.

I have already shown that it is not illuminated. In fact it is also covered by trees and facing more away from the neighbouring buildings compared to the balcony.
Yes there were break-ins through the balcony. But you forgot that
1. The squatters or burglars had comfort of knowing no one is inside to surprise them.
2. The windows, including Filomena's were sealed shut by the police.

In fact the access through the balcony wouldn't be any easier for Rudy that through the window:

If he would be surprised there by the tenants, his options to quickly get away were very limited.



As for your "sweater argument" I really can't see what your problem is. Filomena kept some clothing in a paper bag under the window. It was stuffed full, so she put some pieces on top of it. When the rock toppled that bag the clothing fell down, forming what is seen in the picture:
http://injusticeinperugia.org/hendry16.jpg
It's painfully obvious. And you're arguing that one sweater is a proof of "ransacking"?

But I posted a photo at least: did you see the exposed soil?

That photo helped me to understand better why you have arrived at your convincements. Being unobservant had it's part in this

 

[Kaosium]

I can't remember what I had for dinner last night.

I have a bit of a pet peeve about the "marijuana defense." I think the lawyers should have left it well enough alone that Amanda and Raffaele just couldn't remember something four days after it happened, without suggesting it was because they were stoned. That just opened the door for people like you-know-who to make accusations about drug abuse.

Oh, I'd bet this came out in the interrogation, and Raffaele was quite honest about it--the poor boy admitted he went to the police station so smoked he forgot to take off his knife. If it did, that would be a wonderful way to force Amanda to embrace the idea that she couldn't possibly remember everything of that night, thus force her to consider the possibility she had gaps in it--leading to the 'repressed memories' portion of the proceedings...

 

[Mary_H]

Miss Represented quotes Dr. Covington but it is not a blog by Dr. Covington. I doubt that the owner of this blog is a psychologist or a doctor of anything. The only decent article I saw from this place from earlier this year was removed.

BTW, he/she makes a comment that PMF and TJMK are really the only two tolerant blogs discussing this case. Go figure.

Come on, Rose -- missrepresented is just as good as the speech analysis guy's blog.

 

[Mary_H]

Oh, I'd bet this came out in the interrogation, and Raffaele was quite honest about it--the poor boy admitted he went to the police station so smoked he forgot to take off his knife. If it did, that would be a wonderful way to force Amanda to embrace the idea that she couldn't possibly remember everything of that night, thus force her to consider the possibility she had gaps in it--leading to the 'repressed memories' portion of the proceedings...

Ah, true, although I think they told her her repressed memories were from trauma.

ETA: By the way, Kaosium -- I laughed aloud:

"I just 'heard' a rumor one of them got caught juicing a piglet, in the literal rather perverse sense."

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6644965&postcount=19716

 

[Justinian2]

Hi Justinian2,
"Us against them", so to say...

I too had a friend whose dream was to become a police officer.
This 1 worked for me and even managed the shop for a few years, a long time ago.
Didn't smoke, but the boy luved his alcohol, you know what I mean?
Became a LAPD detective, still is.

Amanda Knox drank alcohol underage, as do a zillion other young adults.

Hey Treehorn, ever drank alcohol while being a minor?

Amanda Knox signed off on a ticket for a loud party at the residence she rented.
Party was not stopped though, and no one had to go home.
Now that is strange!

Foxy Knoxy, she who swiveled her hips, she who did cartwheels,
she who had a pink toy, she who took daily showers(!), she who smelled like sex, she who bought some panties,
she who would kill for a pizza, heck she who even posed, as any typical teenager does, with a gun!***

You know what Justinian2?
Treehorn and the other colpevolisti luv pointing all this out, it's called character assassination!
For what else is there when absence of evidence is evidence of absence?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

***
Speakin' of guns, I own a Colt 380 and a Mossberg shotgun.
I once had a photograph shot by a professional surf photographer of me holding a real UZI that a certain drug dealer owned
that was afterwards published, believe it or not, in a surf magazine back in the mid '80's. My nickname was Radical.

And I made guns as a teenager. It was for the fun of it. The only person I almost shot was myself as the cartrige shot out the back of the gun. That stopped my gun making days.

We are remembered for our imperfections.

 

[Mary_H]

© 2010 The Associated Press
Dec. 11, 2010, 4:35AM

PERUGIA, Italy — The American student convicted of murdering her British roommate in Italy in 2007 has said she is the innocent victim of an "enormous mistake."

Amanda Knox said Saturday in an emotional address to an appeals court that her life had been "broken" by three years in jail. She insists she is not the "dangerous, diabolical" person described by the prosecution.

Knox was convicted last year of sexually assaulting and murdering Meredith Kercher, and sentenced to 26 years in prison. She denies wrongdoing.

Knox was in tears as she said she thinks of Kercher as a dear friend she is "grateful and honored" to have met.

Also on trial is Raffaele Sollecito, Knox's ex-boyfriend, who was sentenced to 25 years.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7334793.html

ETA: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...nda-Knox-back-in-court-for-murder-appeal.html

 

[Justinian2]

Did any of the police officers have a history that included the use of street drugs?

[...]

Look, I'm not claiming to know whether the cops were all 'angels' - far from it - but unless and until the defense team can dig SOMETHING up on at least ONE of these officers, the accused are much, much better targets for the label "weirdly motivated."

You have mixed the mischief of two people together. That isn't fair.

Can't attack the officers. As horrible as it sounds, you have to make friends with cops - even in the USA where nobody is ever sued for slander by a cop. You can't go around making the cops mad in Italy or the USA. Why? The reality is that they will find something to charge you with even if they have to make it up.

 

[Kaosium]

© 2010 The Associated Press
Dec. 11, 2010, 4:35AM

PERUGIA, Italy — The American student convicted of murdering her British roommate in Italy in 2007 has said she is the innocent victim of an "enormous mistake."

Amanda Knox said Saturday in an emotional address to an appeals court that her life had been "broken" by three years in jail. She insists she is not the "dangerous, diabolical" person described by the prosecution.

Knox was convicted last year of sexually assaulting and murdering Meredith Kercher, and sentenced to 26 years in prison. She denies wrongdoing.

Knox was in tears as she said she thinks of Kercher as a dear friend she is "grateful and honored" to have met.

Also on trial is Raffaele Sollecito, Knox's ex-boyfriend, who was sentenced to 25 years.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7334793.html

ETA: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...nda-Knox-back-in-court-for-murder-appeal.html

I like this part especially:

"Then he claimed robbery was the motive before settling on a belief that the killing had taken place because of a personal animosity between the two young women. He also described Knox as "a natural-born killer... a naturally violent person.""

None of which was backed by a scintilla of evidence. Even the best Treehorn can come up with was the rocks that were apparently thrown at her going away party, with no real reason to think that Amanda was involved with that.

I wonder if that new prosecutor will try this tack with no evidence and the tabloid campaign faded and the newer information overshadowing it.

 

[Mary_H]

I like this part especially:

"Then he claimed robbery was the motive before settling on a belief that the killing had taken place because of a personal animosity between the two young women. He also described Knox as "a natural-born killer... a naturally violent person.""

None of which was backed by a scintilla of evidence. Even the best Treehorn can come up with was the rocks that were apparently thrown at her going away party, with no real reason to think that Amanda was involved with that.

I wonder if that new prosecutor will try this tack with no evidence and the tabloid campaign faded and the newer information overshadowing it.

Which story contained those lovely sentiments?

 

[RoseMontague]

hm I always heard it was 15. So she goes in for a few hours and points the finger at Patrick. What a messed up thing to do.

What is this throwing Raffaele under a bus thing. I'm new to this.

It is true than there are many over estimated interrogation times coming from the innocent side some amounting to 50+ hours over a period of 5 days. However, to say a "few hours" does not really tell the story either. This is my guestimate on this:

2 Nov. We know that a group of them including Filomena and her boyfriend as well as Amanda and Raffaele were taken to the police station around 3:30PM and left about 3:00AM the following morning. I am going to guess about 4 hours of interrogation with Amanda at this time.

3 Nov. Amanda and Raffaele show up around 2PM and leave about 10PM. I'll go with about 4 hours on this one.

4 Nov. An intercepted call from Amanda indicates as she is waiting to be interviewed that she is already stressed and exhausted and that the police had already been shouting at her and in her words she felt she was being treated like a criminal. This one goes from around 3PM until 9PM and in another intercepted call she indicates she was interrogated for 5 hours.

5/6 Nov. It appears that she was interviewed starting around 10PM and gave her false accusation at 1:45AM. Let's go with 3 hours on this one. We have seen that she was pressed for more detail (due to the vagueness of her statement) and she gave an additional statement at 5:45. I am going to say just 1 hour on this one.

This puts my guess at about 17 hours total over 5 days of actual interrogation time. Google translation from Amanda's appeal:

And in fact in the examination of the defendant (p. 12 June 2009 hearing. 95 and et seq.) the Knox said:
"So during the question there were people all around me in front
so back, and someone yelled from here, someone said "no, no, no, maybe no memories here, "shouted another with this guy and then there was a cop behind me that I did so. Dif. (Mr. Ghirga): once twice. Charged two times the first time I did so and we ran towards her and then he made another.
Dif. (Mr. Ghirga) then when you had the interview goes well this story you say, then you have a crying, then you are brought some tea some coffee, some pastries, something, if it happens, if more precise.
Charged: they brought me things only after I statements, so I was there, they were screaming at me and I only wanted go away because I thought my mom came and then I said look I have my phone because I want to call my mom "said no and then there was all this mess, I screamed, I said that I
threatened, just then it was only after I made the statement that he said, "No, no, no, do not worry protects you from" so it is come.

 

[Kaosium]

Which story contained those lovely sentiments?

The link on the Telegraph page to an older story, directly linked here.

Kind of a sad headline.

Looks like the ferret's reversing at the Telegraph at least, or however that phrase goes. Not that the English press matters much in Perugia.

 

[RoseMontague]

A direct apology to Patrick:

http://translate.google.com/transla...aset.it/cronaca/articoli/articolo497969.shtml

"Mi dispiace - ha continuato - perché non volevo farti torto. Sono stata ingenua, dovevo sopportare le pressioni. Tu sai cosa vuol dire subire accuse ingiuste sulla tua pelle. Spero riuscirai a trovare pace". "I'm sorry - he continued - not wanting to get wrong. I was naive, I had to endure the pressure. You know what it means to be unfair accusations on your skin. I hope we find peace."

 

[RoseMontague]

And sympathy for Meredith's family:

http://translate.google.com/transla...da_in_lacrime_mi_dispiace_che_mez_non_c_e_piu

"I'm sorry that all this happened - said Amanda, turning to the court -. Non e' giusto e non puo' esserlo per nessuno. It 's not right and can not' be for anyone. Meredith era gentile, intelligente, simpatica e disponibile. Meredith was kind, intelligent, friendly and helpful. Sono grata e onorata di averla potuta conoscere e non siete soli quando la ricordate". L'avvocato Francesco Maresca, legale di parte civile della famiglia Kercher, ha lasciato l'aula durante le dichiarazioni della studentessa americana. Mom I am grateful and honored to have her know and could not remember when you are alone. "The lawyer Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing plaintiffs in the Kercher family, has left the room during the statements of the American student.

 

[quadraginta]

It would be one thing if Raffaele had made this remark spontaneously, with no instigation. For example, it would be highly suspicious if Raffaele had spontaneously written, "By the way, if the police should happen to find a knife in my kitchen drawer with Meredith's DNA on it, it's because we cooked at her house and I pricked her with it."

It is not so suspicious, though, when his lawyer tells him the knife proves nothing because the girls could have borrowed it and used it for cooking at their house, and after mulling it over for a couple of days, the power of suggestion leads Raffaele to make some speculations, out of desperation at trying to figure out HOW on earth this knife could have Meredith's DNA on it.

<snip>

Funny how none of his speculations entertained the possibility that a mistake had been made because there wasn't any way Meredith's DNA could have gotten on that knife, but only weak attempts to explain away its presence. That doesn't seem to have been a difficult conjecture for any of the people here that believe he is innocent to have arrived at.

 

[quadraginta]

Why do you suggest we have made allegations of some combination of corruption, malfeasance, incompetence or conspiracy without substantiation? I don't know any innocentisto who started out with prejudice against the major players in this situation, except for the families, and they are not posting here. Doug Preston no doubt had his suspicions, but most of us had never heard of him until months after Amanda and Raffaele were taken into custody.

There are in fact, many of the innocentisti "persuasion" who are genuine Italophiles, who resist and discourage any hint of painting the country or its citizens with the brush reserved for the bad guys. What do you think we have accused Mignini, Giobbi, Stefanoni, the Keystone Kops and the Kangaroo Kourt of, that we have not been able to provide evidence for?

You're kidding, right?

 

[Withnail1969]

Funny how none of his speculations entertained the possibility that a mistake had been made because there wasn't any way Meredith's DNA could have gotten on that knife, but only weak attempts to explain away its presence. That doesn't seem to have been a difficult conjecture for any of the people here that believe he is innocent to have arrived at.

I think we can imagine how that conversation went.

'It can't be Meredith's - there must be some mistake!'

'It's hers alright - You'd better think of some explanation for this or you're going to jail for 30 years!'

5 hours of shouting later - 'possibly pricked Meredith while cooking' defence emerges.

 

[Mary_H]

Funny how none of his speculations entertained the possibility that a mistake had been made because there wasn't any way Meredith's DNA could have gotten on that knife, but only weak attempts to explain away its presence. That doesn't seem to have been a difficult conjecture for any of the people here that believe he is innocent to have arrived at.

You're right, it is funny. I guess it shows how gullible he was. Here was his first reaction:

"Last night I saw on television that the knife that I had at home (the one from the kitchen) has traces of Meredith and Amanda (latent) ... my heart jumped in my throat and I was in total panic because I thought that Amanda had killed Meredith or had helped someone in the enterprise."

He could have thought a lot of other stuff, like, "Oh, come on, get off it, that's impossible!" That is probably what most of us would have done in his place. Instead, he seems to have believed what he heard, right off the bat.

On the other hand, it would be interesting to analyze his diary from the point of view of him possibly having been instructed by his lawyers to keep it, and to always be thinking of it as a way to defend himself, should the need arise.

 

[Mary_H]

You're kidding, right?

You didn't answer the questions.

 

[Mary_H]

Perhaps a change in avatars would help:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/383964d03646ddb969.gif[/qimg]

Excellent, Rose! I wish we had a "like" feature on this thread.