Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris_Halkides]

Swiss professor

So you are saying amanda said nothing after having put Patrick in jail because "what difference did it make what amanda said"?
Sorry, I have a hard time comprehending this kind of moral compass.
She could easily have instructed her lawyers that the poor girl was bent out of shape from being denied food for two hours and that the accusation was entirely of her own making, no?
And yes, I would hope he was released after his alibi checked out. The reason for their "stalling" was that the professor who was with him that night lived abroad.

Sometimes Mary we must accept the truth for how it plays. There are not always sinister motives on the part of authorities.
Why do you suppose this is always your first reaction?

loverofzion,

One thing that most pro-guilt and pro-innocence commenters should be able to agree upon is that once Amanda was taken into custody, her best course of action is to remain silent, unless her lawyers direct her to do otherwise.

Your recollection of the facts about the Swiss professor is not entirely accurate. He called the authorities, who told him to call back tomorrow (that is how uninterested they were). He traveled to Italy and gave Patrick an alibi on 11 November, but ILE continued to hold him for about a week and kept his bar closed for months.

 

[Bob001]

The IT guy in me suspects that automated recording is not necessarily a good idea. Seems like a waste of recording media and the room may be also used for interviews that may not warrant a recording.

From the Innocence Project:
"Over 500 jurisdictions nationwide, including the states of Alaska, Minnesota and Illinois, regularly record police interrogations. A 2004 study conducted by Illinois officials of 200 locations that implemented this reform found that police departments overwhelmingly embrace the measure as good law enforcement whose time has come..."

http://www.innocenceproject.org/fix/False-Confessions.php

Police departments recognize that recording interrogations -- which would include questioning of witnesses, not just suspects -- creates a documentary record that is much more reliable and complete than somebody's scribbled notes, protects the rights of witnesses and suspects, AND also protects the police against false allegations of misconduct. There is no downside. Almost every jurisdiction tapes 911 phone calls, many thousands of calls every year in every big city, and nobody worries about "a waste of recording media."

It's astonishing that, when faced with what must have been one of the most brutal crimes this small town had ever seen, the Perugia police didn't record every interview they conducted. If nothing else, this is gross ineptitude. It becomes suspicious when we learn that the police apparently did record some interviews, but just not the ones of their primary suspects (and roommates and friends of the victim are always primary suspects, no matter when and how they are so labeled). I doubt that the cost of CDs and SD cards is the reason.

 

[loverofzion]

You have quoted a snippet of testimony that doesn't explicitly refer to movies or music, and presented it as proof that no music or movies were viewed.

What's your alternative hypothesis? Gremlins put those ones and zeroes on the platter of Raffaele's laptop's hard drive?

You don't have an alternative hypothesis. You've just got some indigestible facts you cannot bring yourself to believe.

It's worth pointing out that Amanda stated that "I lay down on his bed, and he went to the desk, and while he was there he rolled the joint, and then we smoked it together." I'm not sure what going to the desk entails but it doesn't seem to clearly rule out Raffaele setting up a playlist at the desk, or watching a movie at the desk, or otherwise interacting with a computer at the desk.

It also doesn't rule out Amanda just plain getting it wrong. Human memory is highly fallible compared to ones and zeros on a hard drive. If Amanda thinks she didn't listen to music that night and the hard drive says she did, I'm going to favour the hypothesis that the hard drive remembers it right and Amanda remembers it wrong.



I think there's some projection going on here. The hard evidence in the form of ones and zeroes shows that the prosecution theory that Amanda and Raffaele were murdering Meredith together than night can't possibly be right.

When rational people discover new facts, they revise their beliefs to fit the new facts.

You are instead searching around for some talking point to use to ridicule the new facts, in the hope that by doing so you can avoid revising your beliefs. That is not rational behaviour.

H/she is not "searching around for some talking point to use to ridicule the new facts".

That is because there ARE NO NEW FACTS.

It's just suppositions, as yet unsubstantiated, on the part of the increasingly desperate defense team.

 

[loverofzion]

loverofzion,

One thing that most pro-guilt and pro-innocence commenters should be able to agree upon is that once Amanda was taken into custody, her best course of action is to remain silent, unless her lawyers direct her to do otherwise.

Your recollection of the facts about the Swiss professor is not entirely accurate. He called the authorities, who told him to call back tomorrow (that is how uninterested they were). He traveled to Italy and gave Patrick an alibi on 11 November, but ILE continued to hold him for about a week and kept his bar closed for months.

Amanda never did seem to have learned that important lesson, has she.

 

[loverofzion]

Has patrick confirmed this?

No.

 

[loverofzion]

In Knox's written communications to the police/prosecutors from 6th November, she makes it explicitly clear that she had grave doubts about her previous statement, and that on balance she now believes that she wasn't at the cottage during the murder (and therefore by definition is in no position to place Lumumba at the cottage either). You should read them.

I have and remain unimpressed by her latter denials (due, acording to her, to "stress")..
She knew the perpretaor was African; she knew there had been a sexual assault; she knew the positioning of the body; she had no alibi etc etc etc.

But you can keep blowing as hard as you want.
Most people ultimately accept the truthful facts surrounging the case.

 

[loverofzion]

There wasn't an interpreter present throughout. IIRC, Anna Donnino testified that she was telephoned at just after midnight on the 6th November, and asked to come to the police HQ. She arrived at around 12.30. And it appears that Knox's interrogation started at some time between 10.30 and 11.30 - implying that there was between one and two hours of interrogation during which time no interpreter was present.

That's just reminded me of the "barely time to set out the chairs" nonsense that used to be part of the refrain from many of those-who-believe-Knox-and-Sollecito-were-correctly-and-safely-convicted, when they were trying to claim that there was simply no time or opportunity for the police to apply any psychological pressure to Knox before she "broke" and "blurted out" her confession/accusation. But we don't here much of the "barely time to set out the chairs" mantra these days, do we? I wonder why?

There was an interpeter present throughout.
She herself is to be called as a witness at the calumnia trial, where she will testify that amanda was NOT mistreated , nor cuffed..

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I'm getting a twinge in my shoulder

No.

loverofzion,

I went through all of this with Capealadin last summer/fall. I suggest you review those comments. Amanda told Patrick that she could no longer work at night. The story that Patrick fired Amanda is simply false.

 

[capealadin]

loverofzion,

I went through all of this with Capealadin last summer/fall. I suggest you review those comments. Amanda told Patrick that she could no longer work at night. The story that Patrick fired Amanda is simply false.

SUPPOSEDLY, Amanda mentioned that to Patrick, after Meredith had been murdered. So, what's with the handing out of flyers?

 

[Justinian2]

What Percentage Prosecution Theories were Correct?

So many of the prosecution's theories have been proven to be incorrect, that perhaps they all should be considered incorrect.

All of the prosecution's theories of Amanda are at least somewhat disproven.
Some of the prosecution's theories of Amanda are entirely disproven.

Anybody care to help me make a list?

Theory: If the prosecution is proven to be highly error-prone, then nothing they say should be believed.

 

[LondonJohn]

There was an interpeter present throughout.
She herself is to be called as a witness at the calumnia trial, where she will testify that amanda was NOT mistreated , nor cuffed..

If the interpreter (Donnino) didn't arrive at the police HQ until around 12.30am on the night of the 5th/6th, and Knox's interrogation started at 10.30-11.00pm, then there wasn't an interpreter present throughout, was there? I can't see how that's so hard to understand.

 

[shuttlt]

So many of the prosecution's theories have been proven to be incorrect, that perhaps they all should be considered incorrect.

All of the prosecution's theories of Amanda are at least somewhat disproven.
Some of the prosecution's theories of Amanda are entirely disproven.

Anybody care to help me make a list?

Theory: If the prosecution is proven to be highly error-prone, then nothing they say should be believed.

Should we take the same view of claims that the knife, or the bra-clasp or whatever are about to be thrown out?

 

[LondonJohn]

loverofzion,

One thing that most pro-guilt and pro-innocence commenters should be able to agree upon is that once Amanda was taken into custody, her best course of action is to remain silent, unless her lawyers direct her to do otherwise.

Your recollection of the facts about the Swiss professor is not entirely accurate. He called the authorities, who told him to call back tomorrow (that is how uninterested they were). He traveled to Italy and gave Patrick an alibi on 11 November, but ILE continued to hold him for about a week and kept his bar closed for months.

Ah but don't forget it was thanks to the sheer brilliance of Mignini that Lumumba got freed!

 

[LondonJohn]

Should we take the same view of claims that the knife, or the bra-clasp or whatever are about to be thrown out?

I agree - it's a bit simplistic to base things on the relative length of lists.

But it's still intriguing to wonder why certain "facts" - many of which later turned out to be fiction - were leaked to the media, and by whom. "Facts" such as the bleach receipts, the Harry Potter book situation, the CCTV images, the suggestive language in the underwear department, the transportation of the "murder knife" in Knox's handbag......

Here's an article from The Times, written on 19th November 2007. Note how incredibly specific it is about the bleach receipts:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2894139.ece

Police said that further evidence against Mr Sollecito had come to light in the form of receipts from a shop near his flat for bleach, bought on the morning after the murder and allegedly used to clean an 8in kitchen knife and Mr Sollecito’s Nike trainers. The first receipt was timed at 8.30am on November 2, and the second 45 minutes later, suggesting that the first container of bleach had not been sufficient. The bleach was also used to clean up the flat itself.

There are about five or six errors of fact in that one paragraph alone. And I'd be virtually certain that the Times reporter (Richard Owen) didn't just decide to make up these details - they were given to him by someone speaking on behalf of the police or the prosecutors. All of them were designed to implicate Sollecito and Knox. And all of them were wrong. How very interesting.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2894139.ece



There are about five or six errors of fact in that one paragraph alone. And I'd be virtually certain that the Times reporter (Richard Owen) didn't just decide to make up these details - they were given to him by someone speaking on behalf of the police or the prosecutors. All of them were designed to implicate Sollecito and Knox. And all of them were wrong. How very interesting.

What about an even earlier newspaper story about Sollectito where he claims to have been the one who discovered Meredith, the one where he states both Amanda and himself were at a party?

 

[LondonJohn]

What about an even earlier newspaper story about Sollectito where he claims to have been the one who discovered Meredith, the one where he states both Amanda and himself were at a party?

Are you referring to this article, by Kate Mansey for the Sunday Mirror, published on 4th November 2007?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sunday-mirror/2007/11/04/italy-murder-details-emerge-98487-20058122/

Because if it is, then Ms Mansey has already come under somewhat intense scrutiny (IIRC) for her.....*ahem*.....creative journalistic licence in putting certain words into Sollecito's mouth....

 

[Danceme]

loverofzion,

I went through all of this with Capealadin last summer/fall. I suggest you review those comments. Amanda told Patrick that she could no longer work at night. The story that Patrick fired Amanda is simply false.

How do you know this is true, that Amanda quit? Where is it cited?
According to Patrick she was demoted, is this accepted as truth? How would one go about finding the conversation between yourself and Capealadin in which you went through all this, which search terms will I use to avoid having to wade through a gazillion posts?

 

[capealadin]

So there it is then. Anything pro Amanda and Raffaele, that's good reporting and factual.
Anything anti, on the other hand, is dismissed and it's lies. Got it.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Are you referring to this article, by Kate Mansey for the Sunday Mirror, published on 4th November 2007?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sunday-mirror/2007/11/04/italy-murder-details-emerge-98487-20058122/

Because if it is, then Ms Mansey has already come under somewhat intense scrutiny (IIRC) for her.....*ahem*.....creative journalistic licence in putting certain words into Sollecito's mouth....

That's the one alright - try counting the errors in that piece. How can they write and print such things without consequences is beyond me. If Raff really did say this, then fine, or if the police did say that in yours, fine, but surly you can't just make this stuff up and get away with it, can you?

 

[loverofzion]

If the interpreter (Donnino) didn't arrive at the police HQ until around 12.30am on the night of the 5th/6th, and Knox's interrogation started at 10.30-11.00pm, then there wasn't an interpreter present throughout, was there? I can't see how that's so hard to understand.

According to whom didn't she arrive till then?