Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[katy_did]

It is not always apparent whether a poster is expressing a thought about what actually happened here, or about what the court should or will do. With respect to the latter, I would suggest that a couple of contested issues have become academic. It is reasonably apparent that Sollecito is not going to take the stand (even assuming he would be permitted to do so by the appeal court), precluding any courtroom debate about what he "really" intended to say in his 11-5 "declaration," and whether his speech was involuntary. With respect to the "internalized false memory" hypothesis, this obviously requires expert testimony, and if this contention was not introduced in the first trial, I think it may be considered abandoned.

Are you talking about what actually happened, or about what should or will happen in Court? With respect to the latter, I think that certainly if Amanda's two statements had been deemed admissible, her lawyers should have called an expert to testify on her behalf (it's unfortunate, in some respects, that they weren't admissible against her, since it would've allowed them to be addressed more directly). This has no bearing on whether the statements actually were coerced though, obviously.

 

[nopoirot]

Well, fine, it did occur to me to wonder if Raf and Amanda might not have been involved in a spat that night. It wouldn't have taken her long to bring him around, of course. And once he started digging himself into a hole, he just kept digging.

 

[RWVBWL]

Both of these reports are dated 11/2/2007

http://translate.google.com/transla...07,cd_max:11/4/2007,lr:lang_1it&prmd=ivnsolfd

PERUGIA - E 'shrouded in mystery death of Meredith Kercher, a British student of 22 years, found dead in a house a few hundred meters from the historical center of Perugia with a deep wound to the throat. Investigators do not rule out any hypothesis. The inside track is that the girl was killed by someone and then fled. E 'was found in her own room with the door locked. Era sul letto, coperta da un piumone. It was on the bed, covered by a duvet. With his shirt up and the bare-breasted, wearing other clothing.

http://translate.google.com/transla...07,cd_max:11/4/2007,lr:lang_1it&prmd=ivnsolfd

English, 22, found naked and her throat cut

Hi RoseMontague,
I enjoy reading the early news reports that some folks post links to,
it allows a person to visualize what how the early investigation went.

1 thing that I picked up upon reading the first article was this:
"It seems that blood stains were found on the broken window and a handkerchief near a railing off the road above, as well as in the bedroom of the victim."

How come I have never heard anything else such as this? That's strange...
If there were bloodstains on the broken window, well then I would think that the break in was not staged and someone of lean build and good strength probably broke it and climbed in. Didn't Rudy Guede have some cuts on his hand? What happened to these blood stains found on the broken window? Wrong info?

I wonder about this handkerchief mentioned also?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

 

[katy_did]

Hi, Fine it's nice to see you leaning on the innocence side

According to your theory Raffaele is innocent because he wasn't there and Amanda is innocent because she was with a married man and she'd rather spend 3 years in prison then give his personals to the police. Do I understand it correctly?

I read not long ago about a woman who falsely confessed to a murder because she didn't want to admit she'd been cheating on her husband. People will falsely confess for all sorts of weird reasons... Not that I think it's all that likely to have happened in this case!

 

[lionking]

What does probability theory- do you claim to understand said theory?- have to do with belief in the pair's guilt?

Indeed. Kompominsto somehow believes that 10% doubt of one juror leads to 10% incorrect convictions.

 

[RoseMontague]

The following is from the church discipline blog:

http://church-discipline.blogspot.com/2011/01/evidence-and-very-unlikely.html

.....lots of tech stuff see previous post......

I'm curious about what CD said above and wonder if his point is valid but I lack the technical knowledge. Anyone here know more than I do?

Need a techtalk translator for this one, imo. No clue. I like the blog though. I don't remember seeing this one before.

 

[Katody Matrass]

The following is from the church discipline blog:

http://church-discipline.blogspot.com/2011/01/evidence-and-very-unlikely.html

From the Massei report: "Encase forensic analysis software determined, for such time period, that the only files created (last created) or written (last written) were generated, automatically, either by the computer’s operating system or the Firefox web-browser within its own cache: being files generated at regular intervals."

From Church Discipline: "I'm going to get a bit techie for this paragraph, explain how this is total nonsense, feel free to skip it as just an example. I'd like you if you are on a mac or a linux box to open up a terminal right now and type the phrase man touch. If you are stuck on a windows box here is what you would have seen link. Touch is a program designed to change timestamps because it is such a common activity. Changing those dates are standard Unix activities, I have tons of scripts that modify those dates to things other than their defaults that run on my machine; for example when I push data to the TIVO I script changes to mtime so that it sorts the way I want it on my TV. Mac's internally have 5 timestamps they associate with files: createDate, contentModDate, attributeModDate, accessDate and backupDate. accessDate implements atime, attributeModDate implements ctime and contentModDate implements mtime. The fsCatalogInfo attribute for a file in objective-C (the default language for system's programming on an Apple) has those five as variables (i.e. for example fsCatalogInfo.createDate), which is to say this is not some deeply hidden attribute, Apple invested money in making these timestamps alterable because programs need to do that so frequently. Other than those 5 attributes there is no obvious place any time information is stored. You can in 3 seconds have a file on your mac that was last modified 10 years before you owned the computer, heck before it was created as far as the filesystem is concerned. And there is no secondary record of these changes. With an average user timestamps are obviously good evidence. By definition average users are people who think about how to work their computer not how their computer works. But Raffaele is a computer science graduate who is doing a degree in genetic programming, he's spending all day thinking abut how computers work. For him, the timestamp mean nothing more than the times he choose to assign to files. He's probably 10x the programmer I am, I'm way over the hill he's in his prime. If this were Amanda's computer I'd think "determined that the only files created" was too strong I'd weaken it to something like "indicates that most likely the only files created". For Raffaele's I'd say "a weak easily modifiable record which at the time of analysis showed..." is a fair characterization."

I'm curious about what CD said above and wonder if his point is valid but I lack the technical knowledge. Anyone here know more than I do?

The media files on which timestamps were lost were all modified on Nov 6 while the computer was in police custody.
OTOH CD is right, if Raffaele was to create a computer record alibi for himself, he could do it as easily as ILE destroyed it. However it would be possible to undermine it with a more closer look, just like the defense did it by analyzing the error logs.

 

[Justinian2]

Hi, Justinian2!
If he was to break the window directly I think he would use a more handy tool, not an unwieldy rock. Another thing is that being halfway up is not a great position if someone happens to be inside the cottage after all. I'd rather throw the rock, then back away into a safer point to look for any reaction.

I would really like to ask Guede how he broke and entered the apartment. In The Fugitive didn't the good doctor wrap a towell around his elbow and then slam his elbow into the window?

We have discussed two ways that Guede could have broken the window with the rock. There is a third. Standing below the window and throwing the rock up as in a lay-up is possible too. The lay-up type throw would result in a slower forward movement of the rock and thus less forward scattering of the glass into the room.

There is also a fourth way. Swinging the rock between the legs and up with the foul shot technique of Wilt Chamberlin would allow good accuracy with even a rock.

To throw the rock horizontally from the same height would result in a high forward speed that would probably send the rock and glass skidding accross the floor to the other side of the room.

To think that this had to be a staged break-in is absurd.

 

[katy_did]

The media files on which timestamps were lost were all modified on Nov 6 while the computer was in police custody.
OTOH CD is right, if Raffaele was to create a computer record alibi for himself, he could do it as easily as ILE destroyed it. However it would be possible to undermine it with a more closer look, just like the defense did it by analyzing the error logs.

And his point, of course, is that Massei jumps from a probability to a certainty, ignoring the possibility that the timestamps could've been altered in other ways - by Raffaele himself, or through the same file having been opened subsequently, erasing any record of a previous opening (which is what the defence argue). I think he's using that example because it shows beyond doubt that Massei is wrong to draw such definite conclusions about the computer activity, rather than because he necessarily thinks Raffaele altered the timestamps so as not to give himself an alibi.

There's really a command on a Mac called 'man touch' that takes you to a place called 'Manpagez'? *Snigger* (yes, I am in fact a 14 year old boy).

 

[lionking]

Jeez, the lay-up and Wilt Chamberlain theory of rock throwing.

I'm out of this thread. Enjoy talking amongst yourselves.

 

[el buscador]

And his point, of course, is that Massei jumps from a probability to a certainty, ignoring the possibility that the timestamps could've been altered in other ways - by Raffaele himself, or through the same file having been opened subsequently, erasing any record of a previous opening (which is what the defence argue). I think he's using that example because it shows beyond doubt that Massei is wrong to draw such definite conclusions about the computer activity, rather than because he necessarily thinks Raffaele altered the timestamps so as not to give himself an alibi.

There's really a command on a Mac called 'man touch' that takes you to a place called 'Manpagez'? *Snigger* (yes, I am in fact a 14 year old boy).

manpagez: man (manual) pages & more
man touch(1)
man pages
By Section
Alphabetically
Other versions of
touch



Yeah, I own a Mac. I'm not 14 but I still had to *Snigger*.

 

[el buscador]

But I'm far far from a teckie and didn't know anything about the manspaez until I followed the 'link".

 

[katy_did]

But I'm far far from a teckie and didn't know anything about the manspaez until I followed the 'link".

Clearly, you were missing out.

 

[Katody Matrass]

To throw the rock horizontally from the same height would result in a high forward speed that would probably send the rock and glass skidding accross the floor to the other side of the room.

Have you seen a video of Pasquali's reconstruction? the windows' inner blind took the momentum of the rock and redirected it down and to the side, just like at the crime scene.

 

[Katody Matrass]

And his point, of course, is that Massei jumps from a probability to a certainty, ignoring the possibility that the timestamps could've been altered in other ways - by Raffaele himself, or through the same file having been opened subsequently, erasing any record of a previous opening (which is what the defence argue). I think he's using that example because it shows beyond doubt that Massei is wrong to draw such definite conclusions about the computer activity, rather than because he necessarily thinks Raffaele altered the timestamps so as not to give himself an alibi.

There's really a command on a Mac called 'man touch' that takes you to a place called 'Manpagez'? *Snigger* (yes, I am in fact a 14 year old boy).

The defence rightfully pointed that from Postals analysis it doesn't follow that the PC was not in use throughout the night. It's in fact a huge misunderstanding on Massei's part. The rudimentary tests they made on the PC are totally inconclusive.

 

[nopoirot]

Buckle certainly implies she was under a lot of pressure and it is certain that this is admitted with that quote. How much pressure is too much? The cops need to look at admitting statements made under this type of pressure the same way they do denying statements. Does the suspect give information that only someone involved would know? Amanda's statements are weak on the details and provide little that could be confirmed. Mignini pressed for more details and got just a little bit more but nothing as they would if Amanda were really there.

So they get this statement and do they ask Amanda if she saw Patrick with a knife? What did he do with the knife? Did he have blood on his clothes? Did he clean up? Where did he put his clothes? When did he leave? Was he bloody when he left? Did Amanda look into Meredith's room before he locked the door? Did he lock the door? What did he do with the keys? Did he take her cell phones? You can't tell me when she made her statement they just said OK write it down, we can't ask her any more.

They knew this accusation was made under pressure and they knew it was missing important details that would indicate it really did happen.

No, I don't think you would want to put more in such a statement than the bare essentials, since you know that you will be required, soon or late, to provide the accused (in this case Lumumba) a copy of it. It's an adversarial system, even if it's not supposed to be. The more details, the more potential holes.

 

[el buscador]

Clearly, you were missing out.

Clearly.

 

[Amazer]

Jeez, the lay-up and Wilt Chamberlain theory of rock throwing.

I'm out of this thread. Enjoy talking amongst yourselves.

Ditto...

 

[Malkmus]

I'm out of this thread. Enjoy talking amongst yourselves.

Kinda meta that you're leaving this thread for one that discusses... this thread.

 

[Justinian2]

Have you seen a video of Pasquali's reconstruction? the windows' inner blind took the momentum of the rock and redirected it down and to the side, just like at the crime scene.

No. I'd like to see that.

It was your idea that he probably used basketball techniques.

At the apogee of a shot from below the window, the rock will have lost all vertical motion. The only momentum left will be the horizontal motion. So if Guede was standing 3 feet from the wall, the rock will hit the window as if thrown from three feet away. It will hit very gently and stop shortly after the window even without hitting a blind and cause less noise.