• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kaosium said:
Just to clarify, so every one of those outside Rudy's lawyer said there was one introduction to him, and at some point there was a spinello smoked at that party? That was the extent of known contact?
Click to expand...
Plus the likelihood of amanda passing him daily at the basketball court, and on another occasion at Patrick's pub.
There has been established an undeniable familiarity factor.
 
LondonJohn said:
Poor reasoning skills - I'm surprised.....

The point here is that Knox's use of "illicit narcotics" is being used by some as a contributory indicator of her deviant personality, and even as a harbinger of her transformation into a "murderous monster". Yet every rational person knows that cannabis use is prevalent amongst students and young people, and has been for 40 years. As is evidenced by its widespread use among most of the peripheral players in this particular drama.

Do you know whether or not Sr Silenzi carried a knife? I wonder if he was ever asked? Regarding Sollecito being "into animal porn", there's no suggestion whatsoever that he was amassing any sort of animal porn collection on his computer - merely that he found one video clip of it, showed it around, and got caught doing so. By suggesting that he was "into" it, you're willfully distorting the known facts.

And please desist with this "into snorting coke" nonsense. There's no evidence to support this allegation. As you might be aware, it was only "adduced" into evidence by Mignini in his closing argument - a practice which I suggest you'd agree was highly improper, since it hadn't been mentioned at all during the main body of the trial. And he made the accusation without any semblance of corroboration or supporting evidence. It was a low tactic which should have been thrown out by the court, and the fact that it was said and stands on record tells us more about Mignini and Massei than it tells us about Sollecito.
Click to expand...

1) "Poor reasoning skills"? Is that your idea of wit? Civility? I'm not impressed....

2) On what basis are you able to conclude that LSD and coke use by RS "hadn't been mentioned at all during the main body of the trial"?
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Is it the same "illicit narcotic" that Meredith smoked, and that Filomena and Laura smoked? Is it the same "illicit narcotic" that Meredith's charming new Italian boyfriend actually cultivated in his house? Just asking.
Click to expand...

Technically marijuana is not a narcotic. The guilters are using that term because it's a loaded word with bad connotations.

Welcome to Propaganda 101.
 
loverofzion said:
There were 47 marks and wounds on Meredith's body, in addition to the three large knife wounds to her neck.
Vicious enough for you, or for the daughter of anyone of your acquaintance?
Click to expand...

Other than the three neck wounds, the only other wound was the one made by the glass fragment in Meredith's room. The rest of the "47 marks" were just that - marks and bruises. Not wounds. And it's very far from certain that all of these marks and bruises were inflicted during the course of her murder.

Here's what the actual autopsy report says about the condition of Meredith's body, outside of the stab wounds to the neck (my emphasis):

There were no noticeable injuries to the chest or abdomen.

The presence of two relatively slight areas of bruising, with scarce colouring and barely noticeable, were detected in the region of the elbow.

On the hands were small wounds showing a very slight defensive response.

A small, very slight patch of colour was noticed on the "anterior inner surface of the left thigh". Another bruise was noted on the anterior surface, in the middle third of the right leg".
Click to expand...

(Massei report, p112 (English translation))

I can only assume that you know this, yet you choose to willfully misrepresent the situation to put forward the utterly misleading claim that Meredith's body was covered in "marks and wounds" - by which you clearly mean to imply that Meredith was beaten (and "wounded") all over her body before she was stabbed. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. And I suspect you know that.
 
Kestrel said:
Technically marijuana is not a narcotic. The guilters are using that term because it's a loaded word with bad connotations.

Welcome to Propaganda 101.
Click to expand...

I'm using the word, "narcotic" in its legal rather than medical sense.

Nothing to be afraid of.

Have a look at the criminal code in your jurisdiction. It will all become clear to you.
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
That is exactly right. People get worn down, until finally they tell the cops whatever they want to hear, just to get it over with. They figure that down the road, as the investigation proceeds, the cops will realize what really happened.

Christopher Ochoa, who spent 12 years in prison after confessing to a murder he did not commit, explained it this way:

"At some point you think, 'If I just get out of here, if this will just stop, I can go talk to an attorney,' "

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...N-ochoa_24met.ART.State.Edition2.4657628.html

Barry Beach made a false confession to police in Louisiana so they would extradite him to Montana. He figured once he was back in his home state, the authorities would look into his background and see that there was no way he'd murder someone, and the whole mess would get straightened out. But it didn't get straightened out. He's serving a life sentence with no chance of parole... except for the people who are keeping the porch light on for him and trying to prod the system to give him a new trial:

http://www.montanansforjustice.com/press.html

This site has a link where you can watch or download the entire two-hour Dateline episode about this case. Studying this kind of material is essential for a real understanding of what is going on in Perugia.
Click to expand...

"Worn down" inside of 2 hours?
 
treehorn said:
1) "Poor reasoning skills"? Is that your idea of wit? Civility? I'm not impressed....

2) On what basis are you able to conclude that LSD and coke use by RS "hadn't been mentioned at all during the main body of the trial"?
Click to expand...

1) No - it means that I think your reasoning skills were poor in relation to the way in which you interpreted my post.

2) On the basis that it was never picked up by any of the court reporters. I strongly suspect that had this issue been brought up and properly examined during the body of the trial, it would have been remarked upon by the assembled media - especially the UK press, to whom factors such as cocaine and LSD use would have pushed a very hot button. Do you think that this actually WAS brought up during the body of the trial, but that it was completely missed or ignored by the reporters?
 
Last edited:
loverofzion said:
An African man sexually assaulting Meredith; her screams, amanda covering her ears; thuds, also she knew of the body position upon death.
Click to expand...

A man she knew well is not the same as a man she barely knows, regardless of African antecedents. As it was eventually decided she was wielding the knife, she wasn't covering her ears even in their eventual fantasy, and the scream was too late to have been Meredith, and probably imagined anyway. She was at the discovery of the body and heard some of it wrong, and some of it right it appears. The eventual fantasy spun in Massei includes yet another person with some sort of sexual motive between them to coinspire with Rudy--who one barely knew and the other didn't at all--to murder Meredith.

That's a long way away from her cowering in the corner while her boss kills her roommate.
 
treehorn said:
I'm using the word, "narcotic" in its legal rather than medical sense.

Nothing to be afraid of.

Have a look at the criminal code in your jurisdiction. It will all become clear to you.
Click to expand...

So you say that Meredith's boyfriend manufactured narcotics and Meredith consumed narcotics. Interesting.
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
Yes, she smoked pot. In the US, pot is classified as a Schedule I Controlled Substance, a designation reserved for substances that are considered highly dangerous and addictive and have no recognized medical value. But it's still pot.



The evidence adduced at the trial included Andrew Seliber's testimony that Amanda received the noise ticket because she talked to the police on behalf of the group, who later reimbursed her for the cost because she was not personally responsible for the problem.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/407194_amandaknoxtrial13.html

But your description is as follows:

- Municipal Court of Seattle "finding" that Knox "committed" the civil infraction/ quasi-criminal "offense" of "residential deisturbance" in connection with a rock-throwing incident/ complaints from frightened neighbors

Where did you get the idea that the neighbors were frightened? Was that adduced at the trial? Did anyone go to Perugia to testify that they were frightened of Amanda because she was throwing rocks? Did anyone testify that Amanda's personal behavior contributed to the disturbance?

You also write:

- Knox taunted a Jewish coworker about "her people" (of German ancestry) "killing his people" (the story has never been retracted)

Was that adduced at the trial? My understanding is that it came out in a minor Seattle publication as the uncorroborated statement of someone whose full identity the reporter declined to provide. What was adduced at the trial was different: Andrew Seliber, a Jewish friend of Amanda, spent his own money so he could testify to Amanda's good character, kind nature, and lack of personal involvement in the noise disturbance.

You write:

- Knox posted the 'stranger on a train incident' where her family could see it (to their dismay/ disgust)

Was this adduced at the trial? Did the subject come up at all during the trial? How do you know Amanda's family was dismayed or disgusted? According to Amanda's sister, who was present on the train, Amanda was joking when she wrote about that:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4113087.ece

You say you don't seek to smear Amanda, but it appears you are emphasizing a handful of dubious reports while ignoring other, better-informed sources who say these reports are not true - she didn't have sex on a train, she's not an anti-semite, she did not contribute to whatever disturbance caused the police to issue a ticket. But even if all of it were true, which it's not, it still would not constitute evidence that she killed her roommate. So what is your objective with all of this? What is your point?
Click to expand...

Excellent post, Charlie. I had been under the mistaken impression that Raffaele had experimented with cocaine in the past and there was a legitimate source for this claim. I had not heard of the LSD reference except in Mignini's closing in which (in my opinion) he just made stuff up. The one news source that SA provided that actually quoted a document or statement on the LSD/cocaine issue with Raffaele is incorrect as the quote they give does not even appear in the transcripts of the document they refer to. I was unable to find a solid cite for these claims and withdraw my opinion that the cocaine issue was one that was backed up by a good cite.

I think that some posters on the guilty side continue with the smears and exaggerations regarding the behavior of Amanda and Raffaele as attempts to justify their opinion regarding guilt, despite the doubts about the forensic evidence. The arguments that Amanda and Raffaele are bad, terrible, evil creatures so therefore they killed Meredith is a poor one not only from a simple logic standpoint but also because the evidence that they are such vile persons is grossly misrepresented.
 
loverofzion said:
After having placed herself at the cottage with Patrick as the murderer?
Why would anyone believe she was making that part up?
What makes that ridiculous in your mind.
Click to expand...


Is this really necessary, loverofzion? Can you honestly claim that you have not seen any arguments in this thread about why anyone would doubt Amanda's testimony?

This post is a prime example of why this debate has been so lengthy.
 
komponisto said:
They weren't mentioned in the Massei report, for one thing.
Click to expand...

It is not in the Micheli or Matteini reports either. In Raffaele's prison diary he states that he can't even roll his own joint. I looked for a solid cite because I was under the impression that the previous cocaine use was an admitted fact. MY BAD, for now at least.
 
treehorn said:
The rationale for the right to silence is based on the notion that the machinery of the state is so vast (armies of police, CSI's, scientists with fancy labs, prosecutors, etc.) that a citizen accused doesn't stand a chance on a level playing field.

So, in an effort to level that field, the accused is afforded (inter alia) the right to remain silent as a means of forcing the state to make its case against the accused without any help from said accused.

In my experience, it's difficult to get an accused to exercise this right - they all seem to think they can sweet talk their way out. Vanitas vanitatum.

The self-serving 'diaries' of all 3 accused in this case were written in full knowledge that they would be confiscated and read not only in the court of law, but in the court of public opinion.

Their arrogance/ disregard for their right to silence has brought us all a lot closer to the truth.
Click to expand...


Were the diaries read in court?

If you believe the diaries were written with the full knowledge that they would be read in the court of public opinion, i.e., the media, then why do you insist their attorneys advised them not to write them? If Amanda, Raffaele and Rudy knew the diaries would be released to the media, why would their lawyers not have known?
 
car ride

TomM43 said:
I am not aware of any source of information that claims that any of the English friends, or the Italian roommates or their boyfriends--much less RS or AK--were told by the ILE that Meredith's throat had been cut.
Click to expand...

TomM43,

I discussed this yesterday in comment 24038. Luca said that they cut her throat to Raffaele in front of Amanda in the car.

You can find the dialog on pp. 77-78 of Murder in Italy. I do not have the original Frank Sfarzo reference (he based his account on witness reports), but maybe someone else can dig it up.
 
treehorn said:
You just missed the (big) point here: They KNEW each other!

Rudy was not, in point of fact, some unknown drifter/ crook that had zero connection to Knox.

They'd been introduced and socialized together, he'd become infatuated with her, he'd show up to see her where she worked, she knew him longer than she'd known Raffaele, etc..
Click to expand...


Your claim was, "Rudy and Amanda smoked dope together on several occasions." While I greatly appreciate you providing citations from the Massei report, they did not substantiate that claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom