Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kaosium]

'Downfall' - The last days of Hitler in the Berlin Bunker. I hear that's a pretty good film.

It's an excellent film, it shows a delusional man in the last stages of his defeat as his enemies close in around him and he lashes out in rage and desperation. It brings to mind the literal interpretation of the old Greek proverb "Whom Gods destroy they first make mad."

I see that Giuliano Mignini was in attendance as the trial opened. I make this random comment to add topicality to this post, no inferences should be drawn as to why that factoid was the first to pop into my mind. There is no comparison between the crimes of the two, that would be egregious hyperbole.

 

[Kaosium]

I think that any investigative journalists who are hanging around Perugia waiting for the next appeal hearing could do worse than look further into the strange case of Patrick Lumumba. Why was his bar closed by the police for months after his arrest and release? Why did he make extremely serious allegations (in directly quoted statements) against the police in a newspaper article, then subsequently disown the allegations? What is the current nature of his relationship with the police and prosecutors' office in Perugia? The answers to these questions might be very interesting.

Indeed that adds context to his curious recent actions of demanding an apology from Amanda before the appeal on Italian TV, then responding to her recent apology on the stand by saying he forgave her long ago but didn't believe she meant her apology.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

pizza and fish

I could be mistaken, but the late hour was chosen partly because of Sollecito's schedule, and also because they were eating dinner and Sollecito asked for time to finish. Also, I am just going by memory here, so I may be wrong, but I think they called them in after realizing they had gone out to eat instead of going to Meredith's memorial (meaning, they meant to call them in earlier, but wanted to give them time to go to the memorial, then when they realized they hadnt gone anyway, they said screw it, call them in now). I guess my point is it might not have been planned as a strategy to call them in late, but I may be wrong, Im sure someone will promptly correct me if i am

Solange305,

Even if I were to accept this account as true, it would still mean for a very late interrogation, after the memorial versus after a late dinner. Either way it sounds like the police wanted to do a late night interrogation. If one accepts Malkmus' inference that the police expected to change the status of someone from witness to suspect that day (I reposted this link today), it starts to look, well, fishy.

 

[platonov]

So that's why my mom always told me never to put my fingers in my mouth! Eww

You may have misheard her

 

[LondonJohn]

John,

I've come to suspect that you are one of the few "innocentisti" here that has SOME notion of the distinction between legal and factual guilt, and the distinction between the civil (balance of probabilities) and criminal (reasonable doubt) standards/ burdens (in the common law system).

So I've got a little 'test' for you: If the civil standard were applied, would you still be arguing that Knox and Sollecito are not factually guilty?

Factually, I don't think that either Knox or Sollecito were involved in the death of Meredith Kercher. I would not be at all certain about that, but certainly on a balance of probabilities I'd err on the side of non-involvement (and therefore non-guilt). If you'd asked that question in about May-June, I'd probably have said that I would have leaned more towards guilt on a balance-of-probabilities basis (although strongly to non-guilt on a beyond-reasonable-doubt basis). But my opinions have altered as time has gone on: I started in April (and a quick read of "Darkness Descending") believing in the factual and legal guilt of Knox and Sollecito - with a few mystifying (to me) caveats. But then I read more and learned more. I'm sure Charles Darwin was a believer in creationism until he learned more and challenged his beliefs.

 

[Kaosium]

I could be mistaken, but the late hour was chosen partly because of Sollecito's schedule, and also because they were eating dinner and Sollecito asked for time to finish. Also, I am just going by memory here, so I may be wrong, but I think they called them in after realizing they had gone out to eat instead of going to Meredith's memorial (meaning, they meant to call them in earlier, but wanted to give them time to go to the memorial, then when they realized they hadnt gone anyway, they said screw it, call them in now). I guess my point is it might not have been planned as a strategy to call them in late, but I may be wrong, Im sure someone will promptly correct me if i am

Thank you for the information. I wonder where that information would have come from and why it was released; do you know if some reporter asked them about this or did it come out in court?

I couldn't help but wonder something I forgot to reply to in another of your posts. I believe I recall you posting about how interested you were in Rudy's mess in the toilet, and that you seemed to find Amanda not flushing it as rather suspicious. It couldn't help but make me wonder if the unflushed dump made you suspicious, what did you think when the Perugian police fried three computers in a rather mindless way, including the one with their electronic alibi?

 

[platonov]

Thank you for the information. I wonder where that information would have come from and why it was released; do you know if some reporter asked them about this or did it come out in court?

I couldn't help but wonder something I forgot to reply to in another of your posts. I believe I recall you posting about how interested you were in Rudy's mess in the toilet, and that you seemed to find Amanda not flushing it as rather suspicious. It couldn't help but make me wonder if the unflushed dump made you suspicious, what did you think when the Perugian police fried three computers in a rather mindless way, including the one with their electronic alibi?

Which one was that Kaosium ?

I fear you have been relying on untrustworthy sources again.

Kevin Lowe's recent arguments contain the same error (repeatedly). What's the source of this falsehood ?

 

[Katody Matrass]

Some interesting courtroom details in this article (Andrea Vogt)

Defense attorneys also requested a review of the couple's computer activity, a second opinion on the coroner's estimated time of death, and a complete forensic review (namely the kitchen knife with Knox's DNA on the handle and Kercher's on the blade that prosecutors say is the murder weapon and Kercher's bra clasp, where Sollecito's DNA was found). Dalla Vedova read a small portion of a letter from noted U.S. DNA expert Bruce Budowle about trace DNA and the sensitivity test for blood, then requested that the document be entered into evidence.

"The doubts about the genetic profile on the knife throw into question the procedures used for the other traces," Dalla Vedova said. "We need to ask an expert what it means when a trace is "too low" and what is the correct procedure for when that happens."

I think Bruce Budowle's name did appear a few times in the context of the case, but his opinion is officially entered for the first time.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mitochondrial DNA

I think Bruce Budowle's name did appear a few times in the context of the case, but his opinion is officially entered for the first time.

Katody Mattrass,

I did a quick PubMed search on his name and got over a hundred articles. He seems to have worked a good deal in the area of mitochondrial DNA forensics, which has some similarities with LCN DNA forensics.

 

[Kaosium]

Which one was that Kaosium ?

I fear you have been relying on untrustworthy sources again.

Kevin Lowe's recent arguments contain the same error (repeatedly). What's the source of this falsehood ?

Some dude posted it on the internet, you mean it's not true? Will I have to re-evaluate the invasion of the lizard people too because I read that in the ether as well? I was so looking forward to that!

Are you saying the logs the defense is making their appeal on is not one of the hash-fried computers, the result of being handled by Perugia's finest?

 

[Withnail1969]

Katody Mattrass,

I did a quick PubMed search on his name and got over a hundred articles. He seems to have worked a good deal in the area of mitochondrial DNA forensics, which has some similarities with LCN DNA forensics.

By the sounds of it he's way out of Stefanoni's league?

 

[platonov]

Some dude posted it on the internet, you mean it's not true? Will I have to re-evaluate the invasion of the lizard people too because I read that in the ether as well? I was so looking forward to that!

Are you saying the logs the defense is making their appeal on is not one of the hash-fried computers, the result of being handled by Perugia's finest?

You got it in one.

 

[platonov]

By the sounds of it he's way out of Stefanoni's league?

He couldn't get the Reed's off - in the best & fairest [by the grace of God] judicial system in the world.

 

[Kaosium]

You got it in one.

So this was the fourth computer, Rafaele's own? I recall reading he'd been using his sister's computer for some reason.

Then why are these logs just showing up now, why weren't they available at the original trial?

 

[Solange305]

Thank you for the information. I wonder where that information would have come from and why it was released; do you know if some reporter asked them about this or did it come out in court?

Don't know for sure, I got that info from reading in forums, so I cant say for sure how accurate it is or where I got it from.

I couldn't help but wonder something I forgot to reply to in another of your posts. I believe I recall you posting about how interested you were in Rudy's mess in the toilet, and that you seemed to find Amanda not flushing it as rather suspicious. It couldn't help but make me wonder if the unflushed dump made you suspicious, what did you think when the Perugian police fried three computers in a rather mindless way, including the one with their electronic alibi?

I don't know what to think. I agree it seems suspicious. I am perfectly willing to admit the police made mistakes. For example, Kevin Lowe, mentioned Patrick's bar, I wish they hadnt kept it closed so long. Fulcanelli I believe had explained that it was legal under Italian law or something like that, so although I dont like it, I am not ready to state there was corruption or anything sinister yet.

I am willing to admit this is a usual small town, and from what I could tell, not used to handling big murder investigations. I am willing to admit the police made mistakes, but I'm not convinced yet that they purposely railroaded two innocent people.

............

 

[Mary_H]

But that doesn't in any way resemble the story he actually made up to explain away the knife.

As for my cite? My cite is his own words in the lie he made up to explain away the knife. Why would he make up a lie to explain away a knife that he 'didn't' believe was evidence against him?

What doesn't resemble the story Raffaele made up -- what Tiziano said, or what Raffaele said? What Tiziano said contains essentially the same elements as Raffaele's story, and what Raffaele said contains precisely the same elements as Raffaele's story. It was a direct quote.

Your claim that Raffaele tried explaining away the knife because he thought it was evidence against himself is no more valid than my claim that he tried explaining away the knife because he wanted to protect Amanda. Except I don't call mine a cite; I call it speculation.

 

[Katody Matrass]

But not until over 40 minutes after Filomena had told them to call the police.

Wrong. It's a serious mistake for someone living and breathing this case for years.
Filomena called Amanda at 12:34. Raffaele's phone credit recharge took 3 next minutes. At 12:40 Raffaele answered call from his father, then Amanda called her mother, next call was to Vanessa then immediately to "112". 16 minutes filled with phone calls and checking the house, not 40.

 

[Withnail1969]

For example, Kevin Lowe, mentioned Patrick's bar, I wish they hadnt kept it closed so long.

Why close it at all? The murder wasn't committed in the bar and Patrick was innocent. Why destroy his business?

 

[Matthew Best]

I can do the math, thank you - and my assertion stands.

To a fifteen-year-old, everyone over about 35 is an "old duffer". It must seem weird to have one old duffer of about 40 insult another old duffer of about 60.

 

[Mary_H]

I'm sorry, but it's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that the police when questioning witnesses in the course of a murder enquiry consisting of a victim the witnesses knew, were connected to and actually LIVED WITH are not going to ask them where they were and what they were doing the night of the murder. It's one of the most important questions to ask. Ask a policeman.

Regardless of the ridiculous things the police may or may not have done, we have no documentation that they asked Amanda and Raffaele how they spent the evening of November 1st, until they asked them about it during the interrogations the night of the 5th. We can't surmise and then use our conclusion as forensic evidence.

And as for your claim that if you had gone out and bought fresh fish, gutted it, cooked it and are it with your partner you wouldn't remember that four days later...I don't believe you. In any case, I think we can all be reasonably certain that at the young age of 23 Raffaele was not suffering from the early onset of alzheimers.

I said I wouldn't remember buying, cooking and eating fish four nights ago. I would remember gutting a fish, but we have no evidence Raffaele and Amanda gutted a fish.