Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[moodstream]

Sounds like this new judge wasn't too impressed with the Massei report:




http://www.westseattleherald.com/2010/12/12/news/amanda-knox-appeals-court-new-jury-members-cry

It also says Also Dec. 18, civil suits brought by Ms. Kercher's family and Patrick Lumumba will be heard.

What's that all about? I thought Lumumba had his judgment and so do the Kercher's. Why are they there? If AK/RS are found innocent, do those other judgments get overturned also? What gives?

 

[Malkmus]

is contradicted by Barbie, who said that Raffaele had been interrogated and placed under arrest before Amanda was questioned. Angel Face, page 68.

///

But Barbie's account of that night is incorrect. She states that Napoleoni didn't start talking to Amanda in the hallway until 1:00AM. This contradicts Amanda's court testimony and the phone records which corroborate Amanda's statements that police started talking to her between 10:30 and 11PM (Not to mention Barbie's version of the hallway conversation starting "sometime after 1 is too close to the 1:45 statement). You haven't proven that Candace is wrong, only that Barbie has a different version. A version that we know is wrong.

So while you look for something of more substance that actually proves Candace is bad source, here is a list of Barbie Nadeau's other mistakes (compiled by another poster):

1. Barbie Latza Nadeau (MSNBC, 3-Apr-10)
"There were 5 spots of blood mixed... Amanda Knox's blood and Meredith Kercher the victim's blood found throughout the house in 5 different areas that were recovered after the use of luminal which is used to recover blood that's been cleaned up."

This statement is a lie. There were no crime scene samples that can be shown to contain both the blood of Meredith Kercher and Amanda Knox. None of the luminol detected footprints found at the scene tested positive for the DNA of Meredith Kercher. When examined four days after the murder Amanda Knox had no defensive wounds and no breaks in her skin from which she could have bled at the time of the crime. MSNBC has an obligation to report to their readers that a guest on their show has made false statements (compiled by another poster).

2. Barbie Latza Nadeau (Daily Beast, 27-Jun-09)
"With the exception of a hickey on Knox's neck, no one documented cuts or bruises on either of the current suspects and police say that Guede did not have cuts or bruises on his body when he was arrested nine days after Kercher's murder."

This statement is a lie. Barbie correctly states that AK and RS had no defensive wounds, but falsely claims that Guede had no injuries. In fact Guede did have injuries to his hands which were photographed two weeks later by German police when he was taken into custody. Photographs of those injuries are available on the PMF web site. Guede's own defense council even admits this and tries to claim that the injuries were from fighting off the real attacker. The Daily Beast has an obligation to retract this false statement.

3. Barbie Latza Nadeau (Newsweek, 14-Jul-08)
"And by her own account in a prison diary leaked to the media, she details her sexual escapades with at least seven men she'd been with in her three months in Italy before her arrest. She even wrote that she might have HIV and then she uses a process of elimination to narrow down who might have given it to her."

This statement is a lie. In fact Italian authorities had used a corrupt prison official to tell Amanda she had AIDS in an effort to collect evidence about her past sexual encounters. Amanda had not had sexual encounters with seven men in Italy and her diary didn't say she had. Newsweek has an obligation to retract this false statement.

4. Barbie Latza Nadeau (Daily Beast, 18-Feb-09)
"In one entry, she describes the night of the crime: "That night I smoked a lot of marijuana and I fell asleep at my boyfriend's house. I don't remember anything. But I think it's possible that Raffaele went to Meredith's house, raped her and then killed. And when he got home, while I was sleeping, he put my fingerprints on the knife. But I don't understand why Raffaele would do that."

The Correct Quote: " So unless Raffaele decided to get up after I fell asleep, grabbed said knife, went over to my house, used it to kill Meredith, came home, cleaned the blood off, rubbed my fingerprints all over it, put it away, then tucked himself back into bed, and then pretended really well the next couple of days, well, I just highly doubt all of that."

Barbie Latza Nadeau's assertion that Amanda wrote the words quoted in the Daily Beast is a lie. The Daily Beast has an obligation to retract this false statement.

5. Barbie Latza Nadeau (Daily Beast, 27-Jun-09)
"He [Rudy Guede] has never changed his story. He has always maintained that they were all there, but that he is not the one who killed her."

Barbie Latza Nadeau's assertion that Rudy Guede has never changed his story is a lie. The words were spoken by one of Guede's attorneys but appear in a headline in the article. Here are two quotes from Guede that show he has changed his story:

Rudy Guede in police monitored cell phone call before his arrest (Nov 2007)
"Listen, you know I knew those girls, I knew them both, Meredith and Amanda, but nothing more, you know that. I've been to their house twice, the last time a few days before all this business, but I didn't do anything. I have nothing to do with this business. I wasn't there that evening. If they have found my fingerprints it means I must have left them there before."

Rudy Guede's prison Diary:
"I tried to help her, she who squeezed my hands. She was strong, "But don't leave me alone," she repeated to me. I told her "Don't worry I won't abandon you." Damn, if I had only had my cell phone with me, perhaps I might have saved her."

The Daily Beast has an obligation to identify to their readers that Rudy Guede had changed his story.

6. Barbie Latza Nadeau (Daily Beast 4-Dec-09)
"At one point the stepmother of Raffaele Sollecito, Knox's former boyfriend who was sentenced to 25 years for his part in the murder, yelled out "F__k you!"

That statement is a lie. In fact Raffale's stepmother had said "Forte Raffale" (stay strong Raffaele.) The Daily Beast has an obligation to retract this statement. This is contradicted by native Italian Frank Sfarzo who was also there.

7. Barbie Latza Nadeau (Daily Beast 12-Sep-09)
A photo of a bloody footprint on a bathmat that has been attributed to Sollecito appears doctored on the Knox Web site-not surprisingly, it matches Guede's foot.

This statement is a lie. The photo was not doctored. The Daily Beast has an obligation to retract this false statement.

As well as:

8. Writing in her book that blonde hairs were found on Meredith's body. These were in fact wool fibers.

9. Writing in her book that a broken bottle of alcohol was found in Meredith's bedroom - no such thing was found.

 

[JREF2010]

You are mistaken. The distance from the window sill to the porch corner is 1,3 m. The grating is even closer, around 1,2 m. Remember that famous Leonardo's drawing of a man with outstretched arms inside a square and a circle? Rudy's arms span was easily above 1,7 m. He could easily grab the sill with one hand while holding the planter edge with the other. That way he could comfortably lower himself onto the grating, without doing any hops or splits - three points of support all the time .
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_427054d0562408eb6c.jpg[/qimg]Notice excellent footholds under the planter. Planter edge constitutes a great handhold. Rocks below are perfectly accessible and it's one step from them to the grating. (Image courtesy of PMF )
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_427054d0562d615132.jpg[/qimg]Notice how short the distances are and how close everything is when you have a human as reference.

He could also very well step down to the rocks below the porch and from there lean against the wall and make even easier step onto the grating.
I understand it could be hard to imagine for someone who spends his days in front of a computer screen, but it's perfectly doable for a fit young basketball player.

Katody,
Have you ever taken this picture, of the man, and "cut" him out and moved him upward to where his feet would be on the upper grate?
I did.

It shows if he were stepping on the top grates, or even the upper ledge of the window, Filomenas window sill would be at his waist.

I did it with basic Paint Shop. (Cut the man out of the picture, slide him upwards in the picture until the footing is on the upper grates/bars of the window, paste.
his knee is almost on the window sill)

It would also be interesting if someone could add a scale/ruler to that picture to give a better idea of the distance of this man climbing to Filomenas window.

He makes it look easy, and come to think of it, I don't recall anyone saying there were a whole bunch of scuff marks nor bent grass, nor broken foliage, and no bent nails caused by him climbing that day.

 

[Chris C]

You mean Twenty (20) year old adult WOMAN.

She was in 3rd year U.!

Old enough to marry, vote, contract, go to war, or run for office in her state legislature!

Rudy Guede is the SAME AGE as Amanda.

Yet you don't refer to him as if he were an "infant."

Is it male chauvinism or racism, Kevin?

Why would you call someone a racist or chauvinist for referring to a 20 girl old female as a girl?

Good ole wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl

A girl is any female human from birth through childhood and adolescence to attainment of adulthood. The term may also be used to mean a young woman.

I find it hard to believe that anyone that speaks American English as their 1st language wouldn't understand that you can call a girl a girl. If American English isn't your first language then use this post to understand that nearly every single American that speak English as a first language understands that people from American substitute woman for girl quite often. I've said this before in previous posts and tried to explain this. If you are from America and using that as a reason to call someone a chauvinist or racist then your argument lacks validity.

 

[Mary_H]

Just curious about the quote I just posted, 2 of them are listed as being in the control room. Were they watching the video of the interrogations, perhaps? LOL.

Yes, one wonders what is controlled from the control room if not technology. Otherwise, it might be called the observation room.

 

[Chris C]

Dan,

The source is Monica Napoleoni. Apparently, that's what Napoleoni said in her testimony in court, where she also referred to her "police log" to confirm the chronology for events the night of November 5/6.

Barbie presents a detailed account........

____________________________________________
"As her officers were booking Raffaele, Napoleoni went out to the vending machine in the hallway, worried that Amanda might hear Raffaele protesting his arrest and decide to leave.

"Who on earth could have killed her?" Napoleoni asked Amanda, her arms crossed as she leaned against the vending machine.

Amanda said she didn't know---that she had wracked her brain and come up with nothing. The two went back to an interrogation room,...." (Angel Face, page 68)
_____________________________________________


Why do you question the truth of this account by Barbie?

///

Arrested for what? What did they arrest him for before Amanda went into the interrogation room? If they had arrested Sollecito prior to Knox going into the interrogation room, then Knox would have been a formal suspect and would have been required a lawyer before they could begin questioning her.

 

[lionking]

Why would you call someone a racist or chauvinist for referring to a 20 girl old female as a girl?

Good ole wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl

I find it hard to believe that anyone that speaks American English as their 1st language wouldn't understand that you can call a girl a girl. If American English isn't your first language then use this post to understand that nearly every single American that speak English as a first language understands that people from American substitute woman for girl quite often. I've said this before in previous posts and tried to explain this. If you are from America and using that as a reason to call someone a chauvinist or racist then your argument lacks validity.

Calling Amanda a girl (or a young girl as some have done) is nothing but an appeal to emotion. I haven't seen Rudy referred to as a "young boy".

 

[Malkmus]

Calling Amanda a girl (or a young girl as some have done) is nothing but an appeal to emotion. I haven't seen Rudy referred to as a "young boy".

Lionking, whenever I'm out with my guy friends at a bar and someone sees an attractive female they'd like to talk to they inevitably say "Check out that girl over there". Since you have to be 21 in America to drink in a bar, it's safe to say that we're referring to adult women as "girls", not minors, and that's the norm. In general (in America at least) everyone in their 20's and 30's is either a "guy" or a "girl". This semantic argument is a waste of time, and a petty attempt make those arguing for innocence look bad.

 

[Dan O.]

Dan,

The source is Monica Napoleoni. Apparently, that's what Napoleoni said in her testimony in court, where she also referred to her "police log" to confirm the chronology for events the night of November 5/6.

Barbie presents a detailed account........

Why do you question the truth of this account by Barbie?

///

I have no reason to question the truthfulness of Barbie's reporting. I am questioning the facts that she is reporting and that is why I wanted to know the source of those facts.

There should be hard documentation in the form of court documents of the 8 officers bringing the charge against Amanda. Unless Italy is more backwards than we already suspect, Amanda's defense would have copies of these documents. These documents would list each of the officers bringing the charge and how they were involved. It seems to me that Candace has gotten access to these documents or excerpts from them. There is no reason for the information presented to be incorrect and no reason to have made it up. In fact, if the information were made up, it would have been made to be consistent with the prior knowledge of the roles of the officers involved. That Giobbi's location was moved from the directors office (given in his testimony) to the operations room indicates to me that the list is probably authentic.

 

[Chris C]

Calling Amanda a girl (or a young girl as some have done) is nothing but an appeal to emotion. I haven't seen Rudy referred to as a "young boy".

I've explained it. If you dont accept the explanation thats your choice. Yet even so, referring to people as chauvinist or racist for calling knox a girl lacks validity.

 

[Chris C]

Lionking, whenever I'm out with my guy friends at a bar and someone sees an attractive female they'd like to talk to they inevitably say "Check out that girl over there". Since you have to be 21 in America to drink in a bar, it's safe to say that we're referring to adult women as "girls", not minors, and that's the norm. In general (in America at least) everyone in their 20's and 30's is either a "guy" or a "girl". This semantic argument is a waste of time, and a petty attempt make those arguing for innocence look bad.

Another good point. What do English call young women in a bar? Lass?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lass

you will notice another reference to young woman being called a girl.

Calling Amanda a girl (or a young girl as some have done) is nothing but an appeal to emotion. I haven't seen Rudy referred to as a "young boy".

Also heres a picture of the Grid Girls at the Australian Grand Prix.
http://www.3aw.com.au/Australian_Grand_Prix_Images?selectedImage=35

How many of these women that are being referred to as girls are under the age of 20?

Paddock Girl from the Australian Grand Prix
http://www.motogp.com/en/photos/paddock+girls/2010/AUS

 

[lionking]

Another good point. What do English call young women in a bar? Lass?
http://

We in a bar here?

I prefer woman to (young) girl (just out of her teens). Are you denying that references like this are appeals to emotion?

 

[Chris C]

We in a bar here?

I prefer woman to (young) girl (just out of her teens). Are you denying that references like this are appeals to emotion?

Its a valid description of her age. If you feel thats an appeal to emotion thats your view on the matter. Yet still, whats the validity of calling people racists or chauvinist for referring to woman of 20 as a girl.

Do you say woman in a bar? What term would you use when referring to a girl of 20 when speaking to someone else?

 

[Fine]

But Barbie's account of that night is incorrect. She states that Napoleoni didn't start talking to Amanda in the hallway until 1:00AM. This contradicts Amanda's court testimony and the phone records which corroborate Amanda's statements that police started talking to her between 10:30 and 11PM (Not to mention Barbie's version of the hallway conversation starting "sometime after 1 is too close to the 1:45 statement). You haven't proven that Candace is wrong, only that Barbie has a different version. A version that we know is wrong.

So while you look for something of more substance that actually proves Candace is bad source, here is a list of Barbie Nadeau's other mistakes (compiled by another poster):

* * *

As well as:

8. Writing in her book that blonde hairs were found on Meredith's body. These were in fact wool fibers.

9. Writing in her book that a broken bottle of alcohol was found in Meredith's bedroom - no such thing was found.

_______________________

And no such thing was found in Barbie's book either.
Barbie only speculates that the small piece of glass found in Meredith's bedroom may have come from a liquor bottle that the lovebirds later disposed of. (Angel Face, pages 166, 170) Nowhere does she say that a broken bottle of alcohol was found there.

So,.........can someone provide a source---besides Candace Dempsey--- to show that Raffaele and Amanda were interrogated simultaneously?

///

 

[moodstream]

Yes, one wonders what is controlled from the control room if not technology. Otherwise, it might be called the observation room.

You're right! Of course they were watching them on video. It seems obvious doesn't it.

 

[Chris C]

You're right! Of course they were watching them on video. It seems obvious doesn't it.

Yes but they dont need to tape a conversation in their control room. These interrogators have perfect memory and are expertly trained. They can remember perfectly everything she said in English and then convert that to Italian without ever using a recording device. Then type that confession up and have her sign it. They didn't need a recording device to do that because they are that good. Thats why they are given medals.

 

[quadraginta]

We in a bar here?

I prefer woman to (young) girl (just out of her teens). Are you denying that references like this are appeals to emotion?

Not only that, Chris is being somewhat less than straightforward in his special pleading (and taunts) about familiarity with American English usage. In many situations in the U.S. the use of "girl" to refer to an adult woman, even a young one, can be considered condescending and dismissive. Even patronizing. It is normally approached with a certain amount of delicacy by discerning speakers, and would be considered acceptable mostly in situations assuming some familiarity. It can be interpreted as insulting or demeaning almost as often as not, as in situations where "chick", or "dame", or "skirt" would also be.

This is the sort of situation Malkmus seems to be using as an additional defense. I find it a bit amusing that he offers guys talking to each other in a pick-up bar as a standard of proper usage. I guess your standards are set by the company you keep.

A young female child could certainly and quite politely be referred to as a "girl". So could a young adolescent, although the propriety starts to decline. By the late teens such appellations start to tread a line.

Context is important, of course, and in the case of Kevin's particular comment I do not agree with treehorn that a line of propriety was crossed by Kevin's usage, which is what treehorn was attempting to suggest. But there can be little question that Kevin was attempting to encourage a sense of diminished capacity or responsibility by repetitious allusions to Knox's youth.

There can be no doubt, however, that Chris's defense of the term was more than a bit disingenuous, since he offered no recognition of the fact that it can be interpreted as derogatory and frequently is, even in standard American usage.

 

[Chris C]

Not only that, Chris is being somewhat less than straightforward in his special pleading (and taunts) about familiarity with American English usage. In many situations in the U.S. the use of "girl" to refer to an adult woman, even a young one, can be considered condescending and dismissive. Even patronizing. It is normally approached with a certain amount of delicacy by discerning speakers, and would be considered acceptable mostly in situations assuming some familiarity. It can be interpreted as insulting or demeaning almost as often as not, as in situations where "chick", or "dame", or "skirt" would also be.

This is the sort of situation Malkmus seems to be using as an additional defense. I find it a bit amusing that he offers guys talking to each other in a pick-up bar as a standard of proper usage. I guess your standards are set by the company you keep.

A young female child could certainly and quite politely be referred to as a "girl". So could a young adolescent, although the propriety starts to decline. By the late teens such appellations start to tread a line.

Context is important, of course, and in the case of Kevin's particular comment I do not agree with treehorn that a line of propriety was crossed by Kevin's usage, which is what treehorn was attempting to suggest. But there can be little question that Kevin was attempting to encourage a sense of diminished capacity or responsibility by repetitious allusions to Knox's youth.

There can be no doubt, however, that Chris's defense of the term was more than a bit disingenuous, since he offered no recognition of the fact that it can be interpreted as derogatory and frequently is, even in standard American usage.

I'm not being less than straight forward. Its clear as day what Kevin was referring to. Yet implying that a persons use of Girl for a young woman of the age of 20 is racist or chauvinist is an absurd statement. Nearly any noun can be used negatively in the English language when applied negatively. Yet the intent of the poster wasn't referring to Knox as a girl in a negative manner.

 

[TomCH]

Lionking, whenever I'm out with my guy friends at a bar and someone sees an attractive female they'd like to talk to they inevitably say "Check out that girl over there". Since you have to be 21 in America to drink in a bar, it's safe to say that we're referring to adult women as "girls", not minors, and that's the norm. In general (in America at least) everyone in their 20's and 30's is either a "guy" or a "girl". This semantic argument is a waste of time, and a petty attempt make those arguing for innocence look bad.

I usually refer to my girlfriend as 'my girlfriend' when speaking English, or 'la mia ragazza' when speaking in Italian.

She's 47.

 

[shuttlt]

Yes but they dont need to tape a conversation in their control room. These interrogators have perfect memory and are expertly trained. They can remember perfectly everything she said in English and then convert that to Italian without ever using a recording device. Then type that confession up and have her sign it. They didn't need a recording device to do that because they are that good. Thats why they are given medals.

Why, in order to type up the confession, do they need total recall? Not that remembering what she said might not be important for other reasons, it's just not that important for the confession document that she signed. Presumably police were able to interview/interrogate people before recording became possible? Naturally that allowed some of them to get away with a few things, but having to hold in their heads every word that the witness/suspect said is a problem that was solved long before audio recording became common, let alone video recording.