Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Danceme]

Surely the most important point in regard to Knox's employment status at Le Chic is that she was due to work on the night of 1st November 2007.

I agree this is the only fact worth anything. All else is speculation and simply useless noise. This thread is so often derailed by discussion over trivial things and whether she was demoted, fired, or quit is just another one. She was obviously still working for Patrick the night in question, in what capacity is irrelevant.

Danceme,

<snip>

Maybe we can start with the "I fired foxy knoxy" article. Which parts of the November Daily Telegraph article do you believe, and which do you not believe?

Sorry, not interested in getting dragged into this particular topic any further, see above. I assume the entire article was, shall we say, embellished.

Just curious here: Under Italian law, if Amanda had told the police at the first minute of her first visit to the police station -- or at any subsequent moment -- "I am an American. I refuse to speak to you until I contact my embassy and retain an attorney," what would the likely consequences have been? Somehow I don't think it would have gone well for her, but I haven't actually read an account of what the law provides, even in theory.

Here's a link to a site LJ posted the other day, providing some answers maybe.

Thank you to Catnip on PMF for providing this photograph from La Nazione, of PM Mignini talking to Luca Lalli outside the cottage on November 7th. RWVBWL, what is that I see in Mignini's hands?

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/2.html

It looks like a white Blackberry Pearl......or a tape recorder.

 

[SomeAlibi]

This is what I refer to as throwing ridicule at the facts from every angle. You have not established that the records purportedly show human activity every six minutes, you just assert it and then ridicule the idea. You have not shown that Amanda ever stated that the computer was not in use, or even that Amanda ever stated anything incompatible with the computer being in use, you just assert it and then ridicule the facts. You have not demonstrated that there is any "event log data" which casts doubt on the error log data, you just assert it and then ridicule the facts.

Add it all together and you've still got the elephant in the room - throughout the entire period in which Meredith could possibly have been murdered, someone was making regular use of that computer.

You can't digest that fact so you struggle for any flimsy excuse to throw doubt on it, regardless of whether the mud you are slinging gives a rational person even the slightest reason to doubt that as a matter of hard, objective fact recorded in ones and zeroes on a magnetic platter, throughout the entire period in which Meredith could possibly have been murdered, someone was making regular use of that computer.



No.

It's an objective fact that it happened. It's recorded in ones and zeroes.

It's now your job to find a theory of the crime which is consistent with the objective facts. If you can't do that, then it's your job if you want to consider yourself a rational human being to amend your beliefs about the case to conform with the new facts.

You assert there are ones and zeros recorded. This would be writing to hard disk event logs in relation to computer use. I have asked what programs were in use. You appear unable to answer the question. Please leave out the digs like "you are unable to digest the facts". Now answer the question as to what applications were being used for nine hours or state that you don't know.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

You assert there are ones and zeros recorded. This would be writing to hard disk event logs in relation to computer use. I have asked what programs were in use. You appear unable to answer the question. Please leave out the digs like "you are unable to digest the facts". Now answer the question as to what applications were being used for nine hours or state that you don't know.

You still have not explained what "hard disk event logs" you could possibly be referring to, leading me to suspect you may be making things up as you go, but regardless demanding answers to manifestly irrelevant questions is not going to make the elephant in the room go away. I'm not playing your game.

Nothing you have brought forward casts doubt on the fact that throughout the entire period in which Meredith could possibly have been murdered, someone was making regular use of that computer.

The ball's in your court. What's the new theory of the crime, consistent with this fact?

 

[moodstream]

By the way, did you watch Clander's film at PMF where Amanda's Italian words are played with a simultaneous english translation? The modulation of her voice in the section on expressing her regret to the Kerchers is all wrong in my opinion. The pitching up at Meredith's death when she managed to do nothing like it in the first trial? It sounded deeply put on. It really should be watched / listened to. Others are of the same opinion. I consider this a big big gamble to have taken because if it didn't come across convincing to the jury, you have a major problem from the off. A real double or quits strategy that.

That is such a shame because I could tell from the modulations in your recent posts that you were ever so close to switching to the FOA camp!

 

[Malkmus]

Another perplexing issue for me was Amanda explaining to the Postal Police that it was not unusual for Meredith to lock her bedroom door (contradicted by Filomena), yet Raffaele had tried forcing the door and I believe Amanda tried looking into Meredith's room from the balcony. Amanda's comment is contradicted by hers and Raffaele's actions prior to the police arriving.

Amanda thought the door being locked was strange, but stated that Meredith did sometimes lock the door. One of Meredith's friends testified that Amanda found it strange. Again, one of those things that, if Amanda was lying, makes no sense as it doesn't help her in any form. I believe her testimony and Meredith's friend's as well.

AK: Certainly. When the police came they asked, at least they asked Filomena,if that door was ever locked, and she said "No no no no, it's never, neverlocked." I said "No, that's not true that it's really never locked," because sometimes it actually was locked. But for me, it was strange that it was locked and she wasn't answering, so for me it was strange, but I wanted
to explain that it wasn't impossible, that she did lock her door now and then.

Hellen Power:

Raffaele was very quiet but Amanda was trying to show brave. She said she found the blood but thought it was menstrual so she took the shower. She said Meredith's door was locked, and that was unusual. She was a bit rocking herself.

Note also that Helen's description of Amanda's behavior is different than the other girls.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

apparently business was slow

@Halides 1 Re the spontaneous declaration and stating it was an apology to the Kerchers, Amanda said that had been "wrong" to think that there was a right time or a wrong time to express sympathy to the Kerchers and she then corrected that. She then apologised to Patrick, which clearly she didn't need to do if she'd done it before. The question originally put to me was whether she had apologised TO Patrick. In cross-examination she said clearly and plainly "no" she had not and in the recent appeal hearing, it is quite clear that by her actions she similarly was correcting her other oversight.

At least now she is unequivocal that she was "wrong"- Edda will have to remember that since she's being out there saying it definitely wasn't the right time to reach out on TV, very firmly, only a handful of days before.

SomeAlibi,

Reasonable minds may differ on the question of whether it is appropriate for the Knox family to express its condolences to the Kerchers under the present circumstances. Amanda may be of one mind and Edda another, but Edda's position (and Curt's) is entirely defensible.

Amanda's working fewer hours is consistent with business being slow. It was slow on 1 November, for example. If one examined receipts, one might be able to tell if this were a consistent pattern or not.

It would certainly be a very good thing if Rudi told the truth about what happened, but one of the few areas of agreement between pro-guilt and pro-innocence commenters is that Rudi has frequently lied. I don't see any reason for him to change now.

 

[Malkmus]

Erm, none. She was sitting with her flatmates prior to any questioning. The questions remain - how did she know her throat had been cut and why did she refer to multiple assailants - "bastards" plural? Why did Raffaele tell Kate Mansey two days later that Amanda had discovered the body and provide more details when we know that they were nowhere near the door and never saw the body at all?

Luca and Paola testified to seeing Batistelli enter the room and describe the state of the body out-loud. These same two people then gave a ride to Amanda and Raf to the police station where Amanda recounted what they told her in the car.

AK: Yes, it was really really cold. First, Raffaele gave me his jacket, but then
the others saw that I was cold, really in shock, so they said come, come,
let's get in the car and get warm. And inside that car, we talked more about...
we kept on saying "But what did you see? Who was there?" So in the car, heh,
still using Raffaele a bit like an interpreter, they explained to me that they heard from someone, from someone else, from one of the officers who were talking, that she...
LG: Meredith

AK: ...that Meredith had had her throat slit, and at that point I became a bit...uh [sigh]...I closed myself off a bit inside...I cried a bit because I kept thinking
but...how is it possible? No...[slightly desperate laugh], it was too
much, so [sigh, voice trembling], and then, we went to the Questura.

As for the "bastards" quote, we don't know for a fact that she pluralized it since it's not a direct quote, but even if she did, the friend who heard it wasn't even sure who she was referring to:

Samantha: At the police station Raffaele was very quiet, nothing strong, but Amanda was always talking at the phone. She was very affectionate to Raffaele but she would keep complaining: 'I'm tired', 'I'm hungry', 'I'm thirsty'. 'I found her, she was in the wardrobe wrapped in a blanket' and with a foot hanging out. 'Those *********** bastards', she was yelling, but I don't know who she meant, I think the murderers.

But let's assume she did mean the killers (plural), is it that strange to assume that the cottage was broken into by multiple assailants looking to steal goods?

 

[moodstream]

Amanda Knox 1:45 a.m. statement to the police
TRANSLATION

QUESTURA DI PERUGIA
SQUADRA MOBILE

Re: Minutes of the information conveyed by:
KNOX Amanda Marie, born in Washington (U.S.A.) on July 9th 1987, domiciled in Perugia, Via della Pergola n. 7; identified by means of Passport n. 422687114 issued by the Government of the U.S.A. on June 13th 2007, tel. 3484673590

On November 6th 2007, at 01.45, in Perugia at the Offices of the Squadra Mobile of the Questura of Perugia. Before the undersigned Officers of the Judicial Authority Chief Inspector, FICARRA Rita, assisted by ZUGARINI Lorena and RAFFO Ivano, respectively on duty at the office above mentioned in the epigraph and in presence of the person mentioned in the re who sufficiently understands and speaks Italian, assisted by the English-speaking interpreter Anna Donnino, who, in relation to the death of KERCHER Meredith Susanna Cara and after the precedent declarations, declares the following: ----------------------
“In order to complete what has been retailed before by means of precedent declarations made at this Office, I wish to clarify that I know and see other people who have also come to my house sometimes and who have also met Meredith and of whom I will provide the relevant mobile numbers ----------------------------------------------------
One of these people is Patrik, a colored citizen who is about 1,70-1,75 cm tall, with braids, owner of the pub “Le Chic” located in Via Alessi and I know that he lives in the area near the roundabout of Porta Pesa. Tel. 393387195723, pub where I work twice a week on Mondays and on Thursdays, from 22.00 until about 2.00. -----------------------------------------------
Last Thursday 1st November, day on which I usually work, while I was in the apartment of my boyfriend Raffaele, at about 20.30 I received a message from Patrick on my mobile, telling me that that evening the pub would remain closed because there were no people, therefore I didn’t have to go to work. ----------------------------------------------------------------
I replied to the message saying that we would meet immediately, therefore I went out telling my boyfriend that I had to go to work. I wish to state first that in the afternoon I had smoked a joint with Raffaele, therefore I felt confused because I do not usually make use of narcotics nor harder drugs. -------------------------------------------------------
I met Patrick soon after at the basketball court of Piazza Grimana and we went home. I do not remember if Meredith was already there or if she came later. I find it difficult to remember those moments but Patrick had sex with Meredith with whom he was infatuated but I do not remember well if Meredith had been threatened before. I vaguely remember that he killed her. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office acknowledges that the statement stops here and KNOX Amanda is put at the disposal of the proceeding Judicial Authority.--------------------------------------------------------
F.L.C.S.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Declaring The recording people

Signed Signed

Rif/Server/F/CDV/Knox/2008 05 08 Traduzione Verbale Knox 01 45

Thanks.

I can see how people who believe Amanda Knox is guilty find this statement damning. There is a satisfying feeling that the police have put the screws to her and she popped. Too bad for them it's all untrue. Otherwise it might be worth something.

A great portion of the confession is spentfinding it difficult to remember those moments, not remembering, not remembering well, and vaguely remembering that he killed her. That last phrase being kind of odd. It really is too bad we don't have a recording.

 

[Malkmus]

Thanks.

I can see how people who believe Amanda Knox is guilty find this statement damning. There is a satisfying feeling that the police have put the screws to her and she popped. Too bad for them it's all untrue. Otherwise it might be worth something.

A great portion of the confession is spentfinding it difficult to remember those moments, not remembering, not remembering well, and vaguely remembering that he killed her. That last phrase being kind of odd. It really is too bad we don't have a recording.

The most telling piece of that statement IMO is this:

I replied to the message saying that we would meet immediately

Clearly shows that these aren't Amanda's words.

 

[Mary_H]

Originally Posted by Chris C
I have often wondered if they got cold and detached confused with tired and aggravated. How many hours had she been answering the same questions?

No one had been interviewed at that stage, they (Meredith's friends) were waiting to be interviewed by the police.

I agree with Chris. Amanda and Raffaele had spent the day dealing with the situation at the cottage and had already been questioned for hours by the time they all got to the Questura that night.

It's hard to know if the people who were talking about Amanda's behavior were doing so spontaneously, or if they specifically had been asked, "Did you notice anything unusual about Amanda's behavior?"

 

[Mary_H]

I've tried to say this twice already: the entire point is what do the ones and zeros amount to? If it shows some credible activity then it's massive for Raffaele. But the problem as I've pointed out is directly contradicting direct testimony from Amanda, direct evidence from Raffaele's ISP that there's no internet activity, direct evidence that it's not audio or visual media being played (VLC and iTunes generate event log data either side of the 8 and half hour gap quite happily) and his girlfriend says he's in the kitchen for what three quarters of an hour and making love to her on the bed and falling asleep together in the bed. And yet you want to jury to believe he's constantly interacting with the computer every six minutes or something for nine hours?

Doing what????

He's not on the web, he's not using music or film, there's no event logs from any application at all, just an unsubstantiated "ones and zeros". So back at you; what do the one and zeros actually denote? It better be bloody good because I can't for the life of me think what one does for 9 hours at a laptop without the web, without music, without video, without applications and when your girlfriend says you are elsewhere.

Can you not see why this looks like a massive problem?

If the laptop were in bed with them, wouldn't the screensaver disappear every time someone moved?

 

[Mary_H]

Erm, none. She was sitting with her flatmates prior to any questioning. The questions remain - how did she know her throat had been cut and why did she refer to multiple assailants - "bastards" plural?

Maybe Amanda was watching when Dr. Lalli made the throat-cutting gesture that is captured in the La Repubblica photo (the one with Mignini's carry-along digital recorder).

Why did Raffaele tell Kate Mansey two days later that Amanda had discovered the body and provide more details when we know that they were nowhere near the door and never saw the body at all?

The Kate Mansey article is not credible. For the umpteenth time.

 

[Mary_H]

Thank you to Catnip on PMF for providing this photograph from La Nazione, of PM Mignini talking to Luca Lalli outside the cottage on November 7th. RWVBWL, what is that I see in Mignini's hands?

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/2.html

Correction: La Repubblica

 

[colonelhall]

Kevin Lowe. Perhaps the elephant was trying to use the computer. Funny that Knox never noticed it.

I suspect that there was no elephant. I am still curious as to what activity Rafael could have been engaged in, though. What did he have to say about it?

 

[komponisto]

Introduction

This seems like quite a worthwhile link:

The Amanda Knox Test: How an Hour on the Internet Beats a Year in the Courtroom.

Sorry if it's been posted before, I don't recall seeing it.

What was quite amusing was that I came across it via PMF, where some genius remarked "It's so close to the style of writing seen by Kevin Lowe on the JREF that I'd be very surprised if they didn't know one another well".

The idea that two unrelated people might both employ the methods of rational inquiry from a well-informed scientific perspective to solve problems seems to be inconceivable to them. We could try to explain to them that there are in facts lots of well-informed rationalists out there, but since they are firing up their incredulity engines at the very idea that two such people could not be close personal friends the idea that there might be more than two of us in the universe is probably too much for them for now.

As the author of that Less Wrong post, I can confirm that I don't personally know Kevin -- though I have very much enjoyed his comments, including this one.

In general, actually, I'm much more favorably impressed with the quality of discussion about this case here than I was when I lurked a year ago. So either my memory is uncharitable (in which case, apologies!) or things have improved considerably (in which case, well done!).

As anyone who's seen me elsewhere (under this username) will be aware, I am a strong, unapologetic innocentista with regard to Knox and Sollecito. Here are some things I'd be interested in discussing with anyone willing (not necessarily exhaustive):

- For any who believe that Knox and Sollecito are guilty: why? I mean this in a very specific sense: what is your ranking of the various pieces of evidence against them, in order from strongest to weakest? How much does each item move your opinion? What is the "tipping point", i.e. the smallest subset of evidence that nudges your probability of guilt over 50%? (Subset need not be unique, of course -- I'd just like an example of a minimal set of evidence that causes you to say "Okay, now that I know this, I think it's more likely than not that they were involved".)

- For those who agree with me that AK & RS are innocent (or are willing to assume this for the sake of argument): what is the most likely explanation for the bra clasp DNA result? Is it the result of contamination at the scene, at the lab, or is it not actually Sollecito's DNA at all (as his appeal document maintains)? I can't say I have much of an opinion on this. Clearly it's a noisy result, and extremely weak evidence of guilt even if his DNA was actually on it. But I'm curious about the implications of Tagliabracci's disputing the match for several (but only a few) of the genetic loci. How likely is it that someone other than Sollecito would match his profile in 10 of the 16 loci examined? If you assume that there are on average, say, between 2 and 10 possible alleles at each locus, uniformly distributed among the population, with alleles being independent of each other (not sure how good these assumptions are!), then calculation suggests this is somewhat-to-extremely unlikely, making it perhaps a better assumption that Tagliabracci has erred in his analysis than that an infinitesimally improbable near-match has occurred. (Imagine selecting two 16-digit numbers at random and having them match in 10 of the digits; do this for both binary and decimal numbers to get the range of probabilities involved.) On the other hand, if this is right, Tagliabracci himself surely realizes this! And furthermore, I believe I read a comment from Halides earlier stating that Meredith matched Raffaele at 11 loci (!). So I have to admit to some confusion here (even if it is of little consequence on the main question of guilt).

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Can't remember. Amanda testimony:


CP: You, in your work, Miss, what did you do?

AK: I had to give out tickets during the day, and then when I...in the evening,
I arrived at ten, and I would give drinks to the people that worked there...
er, the people that came there.

- - -

AK: Around the middle of October is when I started.

CP: What days of the week did you work? Every day or some days?

AK: In the beginning, I worked every day, and then we organized to work
twice a week.

CP: Which days? Do you remember?

AK: Tuesday and Thursday.



So appears she got put on more restricted duties which is consistent with Patrick's interview and Angel Face.

He cut her hours because he didn't have enough business to keep her busy, which is the same reason he told her not to come in on Nov 1.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

- For those who agree with me that AK & RS are innocent (or are willing to assume this for the sake of argument): what is the most likely explanation for the bra clasp DNA result? Is it the result of contamination at the scene, at the lab, or is it not actually Sollecito's DNA at all (as his appeal document maintains)? I can't say I have much of an opinion on this. Clearly it's a noisy result, and extremely weak evidence of guilt even if his DNA was actually on it. But I'm curious about the implications of Tagliabracci's disputing the match for several (but only a few) of the genetic loci. How likely is it that someone other than Sollecito would match his profile in 10 of the 16 loci examined? If you assume that there are on average, say, between 2 and 10 possible alleles at each locus, uniformly distributed among the population, with alleles being independent of each other (not sure how good these assumptions are!), then calculation suggests this is somewhat-to-extremely unlikely, making it perhaps a better assumption that Tagliabracci has erred in his analysis than that an infinitesimally improbable near-match has occurred. (Imagine selecting two 16-digit numbers at random and having them match in 10 of the digits; do this for both binary and decimal numbers to get the range of probabilities involved.) On the other hand, if this is right, Tagliabracci himself surely realizes this! And furthermore, I believe I read a comment from Halides earlier stating that Meredith matched Raffaele at 11 loci (!). So I have to admit to some confusion here (even if it is of little consequence on the main question of guilt).

It's a bad strategy on the part of the defense. Thanks to translators on the Internet, the Massei report is known far and wide as a farce. Hellman needs to come up with something that is at least superficially credible. By basing the appeal on a weak argument that the e-gram is not a match for Sollecito, the defense provides Hellmann and his "independent experts" with a golden opportunity to reject that argument without addressing the much stronger case for contamination.

 

[komponisto]

Charlie Wilkes:

By basing the appeal on a weak argument that the e-gram is not a match for Sollecito, the defense provides Hellmann and his "independent experts" with a golden opportunity to reject that argument without addressing the much stronger case for contamination.

It should be noted that Sollecito's appeal also emphasizes the likelihood of contamination, of course, in addition to arguing that the DNA doesn't match.

 

[Antony]

Yes, although the world I live in is nice. It's one in which remorseless sex killers are imprisoned for their crimes and are offered mercy and the chance for rehabilitation and reintegration into civilised society. If Knox had done this in her home state in the USA, there's a strong possibility that the prosecution would have sought the death penalty. She cannot count the many blessings accorded her by committing this abhorrent act in the comparative safety of Italy.

It's true. If Amanda had been wrongly convicted in the US, there's a high chance (depending on the state) that she would have been wrongly condemned to death. I'm not one of those who think that the safeguards are such that this could not have happened in the US (or the UK).

All this has no bearing at all on whether or not the verdict was safe, and is an unoriginal non-sequitur of the same kind as the complaints that Amanda is receiving more attention in the discussion than the victim of the crime, Meredith Kercher. Establishing the truth of Meredith's death is as much a service to her as clearing Amanda and Raffaele's wrongful conviction.

 

[Antony]

It's also very pertinent to note that the Perugia police and prosecutors had come in for criticism over their failure to bring any charges related to the murder of student Sonia Marra, which took place almost exactly a year previous to the Kercher murder. So when Meredith was murdered, they must have been aware of the perceived need to "do better this time".

Add to this the seeming fact that students were starting to desert Perugia in the wake of Meredith's murder, in fear of a serial student killer on the loose, and it's easy to see a situation emerging where the police and prosecutors have a near-desperate need to restore public confidence by announcing that they have - in the words of Hercule Poirot - "solv-eddd ze crime". And I think that the tone and content of the press conference of 6th November only adds to that suspicion.

That's a factor, but I rather think that in a system focussed on establishing the truth rather than pinning the blame, it would not have made the travesty possible. Anyway, what proportion of Perugia students believe that the police did a good job in this case? How many of them recognise that the police are part of the problem, and that if they have the misfortune to discover the body of a murdered friend, that they will then spend the next 3 years fighting for their own freedom?