Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[tsig]

TomCH,

Lying to suspects is one thing, but lying or misrepresenting the facts to the press is another. Both the stories of bleach receipts and the red bathroom photograph may have compromised the defendants' right to a fair trial, IMO. Even if they did not, they are absolutely indefensible.

Maybe the police had an "internalized false memory". They were under a lot of stress.

 

[Justinian2]

Of course, it's silent there. They're fed up with people providing evidence that Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

Ha! That's the stark truth. PMF's speciality is the ad hominem attack.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for response to modded post.

 

[Amazer]

Maybe the police had an "internalized false memory". They were under a lot of stress.

Not too mention long hours of interviews that they had to sit through.

 

[Chris C]

Not too mention long hours of interviews that they had to sit through.

Up until that 12 interrogator session to take a witness statement, I thought all the interviews Knox and Sollecito gave were to Mignini. Also, I've always wondered who approved all the overtime for the 12 interrogators to take a midnight witness statement and what reason it was approved.

 

[Poppy1016]

Up until that 12 interrogator session to take a witness statement, I thought all the interviews Knox and Sollecito gave were to Mignini. Also, I've always wondered who approved all the overtime for the 12 interrogators to take a midnight witness statement and what reason it was approved.

The reason for this is easy for everyone to see. AK and RS were suspects from the beginning. They surely would not need 12 interrogators to hear a witness statement.

 

[samba]

Lies are ALWAYS deliberate.

This video was posted here a few months ago. It's nothing new...the Michael Crowe case.

Watch this and let me know if you think these tactics (shown in the actual interrogation) are legit. Was this lie deliberate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJcqjPxtIXc

 

[tsig]

Their job is to lie? Yet most people don't see the dilema when the police lie to a suspect and wait for an answer.

If the suspect tells the truth and its not what the police want to hear, then the police accuse them of lying. Which in Knox's case is what happened. She told them the truth and they accused her of lying. Since the truth wouldn't get them to go away, whats left?

If the suspect lies to explain the lie the police have told them then you want to accuse the suspect of lying and say its the job of the police to lie. Yet the prosecution in the Knox case didn't stop with only lying to the suspects. They lied to the media, to the public, to the suspects, to the victims family, and to the court. Then they try to say, Knox/Sollecito have no credibility.

In the US it's OK for the police to lie:

During interrogations, police who use this tactic may lie about the facts of a case. For example, where you have an 18 year old male who has a 15 year old girlfriend, the officer will tell him that they have evidence that he raped her, when in fact, they do not. The 18 year old tells the officer that they had consensual sex and that there was no rape involved; now the officer has a confession as to Statutory Rape that came straight from the mouth of the suspect

http://www.criminalattorney.com/blog/police-can-lie-to-you/

We don't have any proof the Italian police even lied to Amanda.

 

[Amazer]

We don't have any proof the Italian police even lied to Amanda.

They're Italian for crying out loud... you expect them to be honest around a pretty American gal?

 

[Antony]

Oh, I've come to agree, ironically I was in the process of trying to put together one of these 'halfway' guilt theories when I read all the interrogation stuff at once and it dawned on me: 'Geez, I know what happened here.'

With me it wasn't even as far as that: I heard about the verdict and just thought, "this doesn't sound right, but maybe there's evidence here that I don't know about." Then when I started reading the blogs, and the first thing I found out was that Amanda and Raffaele were at the scene when the crime was discovered - so it was obvious it was a case of the police "solving" the crime the easy way.

It quickly became clear that for all of their stridency, the pro-guilt faction had no genuine evidence whatsoever, but based their arguments pretty much entirely on the claim: "innocent people don't do this!" Then I found out about the false confession from an all-night interrogation session with no safeguards for Amanda's rights (OK, the guilters were arguing the toss about whether or not it was a "confession"); the dodgy DNA results (guilters were saying things like "DNA does not lie"); and the bizarre accusations of a staged break-in and a clean-up.

At every turn, each aspect of the case served to discredit the "investigation" more and more, and it was with mounting perplexity that I read the bloggers who posted about "overwhelming evidence of guilt", "a mountain of evidence" or "incontrovertible evidence". At risk of inviting another meta-discussion, the antics of the guilter faction in this discussion is a curious illustration of human psychology.

 

[Kaosium]

It seems to me that if someone being questioned in a murder case makes a calculated attempt to deceive (some might call it lying) then it could be reasonably concluded that the person who made the calculated attempt to deceive had a reason to do so and might be implicated in the murder especially when this calculated attempt to deceive placed he at the murder scene.

However, who could reasonably assume that those 'vague' and 'confused' statements were actually a 'calculated attempt to deceive?'

Why Patrick Lumumba, and why did DiFilice (or whatever his name is) say that her story 'matched' the facts as they knew them?

 

[Justinian2]

In the US it's OK for the police to lie:

During interrogations, police who use this tactic may lie about the facts of a case. For example, where you have an 18 year old male who has a 15 year old girlfriend, the officer will tell him that they have evidence that he raped her, when in fact, they do not. The 18 year old tells the officer that they had consensual sex and that there was no rape involved; now the officer has a confession as to Statutory Rape that came straight from the mouth of the suspect

http://www.criminalattorney.com/blog/police-can-lie-to-you/

We don't have any proof the Italian police even lied to Amanda.

That police interrogation technique should be called rape.

 

[Kaosium]

In the US it's OK for the police to lie:

During interrogations, police who use this tactic may lie about the facts of a case. For example, where you have an 18 year old male who has a 15 year old girlfriend, the officer will tell him that they have evidence that he raped her, when in fact, they do not. The 18 year old tells the officer that they had consensual sex and that there was no rape involved; now the officer has a confession as to Statutory Rape that came straight from the mouth of the suspect

http://www.criminalattorney.com/blog/police-can-lie-to-you/

We don't have any proof the Italian police even lied to Amanda.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1570225/Transcript-of-Amanda-Knoxs-note.html

"I have been told there is hard evidence saying that I was at the place of the murder of my friend when it happened."

 

[Kaosium]

What the heck does "murder on trial" even mean? Sounds like they are doubting that a murder even took place.

That is an odd title, it almost looks likes someone misplaced the colon and it should read: "Amanda Knox Murder: On Trial in Italy."

Or someone in Hollywood needs another line of work.

 

[RoseMontague]

That is an odd title, it almost looks likes someone misplaced the colon and it should read: "Amanda Knox Murder: On Trial in Italy."

Or someone in Hollywood needs another line of work.

I take it to mean that the verdict is on trial at this point. Still a pretty bad title.

 

[Chris C]

In the US it's OK for the police to lie:

During interrogations, police who use this tactic may lie about the facts of a case. For example, where you have an 18 year old male who has a 15 year old girlfriend, the officer will tell him that they have evidence that he raped her, when in fact, they do not. The 18 year old tells the officer that they had consensual sex and that there was no rape involved; now the officer has a confession as to Statutory Rape that came straight from the mouth of the suspect

http://www.criminalattorney.com/blog/police-can-lie-to-you/

We don't have any proof the Italian police even lied to Amanda.

Police can make false assertions, however in the US there is a line. Knox's interrogation would have crossed that line in the US. Crossing that line in the US is considered Coercion.

http://policelink.monster.com/train...g-to-a-suspect-how-far-can-an-investigator-go

 

[Chris_Halkides]

lying to the press

Maybe the police had an "internalized false memory". They were under a lot of stress.

tsig,

They were not under stress when they declared the case closed. Are you defending the police lying or misrepresenting facts to the press? What public good is being served by this behavior?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Murder in Italy used the trial transcripts as a source

To all,

Some here and elsewhere have criticized Candace Dempsey's book Murder in Italy as a source. Some have derisively and inaccurately referred to her as a food blogger. They should check her C.V. Ms. Dempsey used the trial transcripts as one of her sources. She has also supplied other information about her sources when asked. Each time someone challenges a statement from this book, the commenters on this thread have been able to challenge the assertion, most recently with respect to witnesses who described Rudi as a girl botherer.

 

[tsig]

Police can make false assertions, however in the US there is a line. Knox's interrogation would have crossed that line in the US. Crossing that line in the US is considered Coercion.

http://policelink.monster.com/train...g-to-a-suspect-how-far-can-an-investigator-go

What lie did the police tell Amanda? All I know they said was that her boyfriend would not back her alibi which was the truth.

ETA: goalpost move noted. First assertion: police lying to witness wrong and illeagal
Second assertion: police can lie but not too much.

 

[lane99]

...Some here and elsewhere have criticized Candace Dempsey's book Murder in Italy as a source. Some have derisively and inaccurately referred to her as a food blogger. They should check her C.V...

Or, you could check the CV (if they have one) of the people criticizing her. Thereafter, the appropriate targets of derision I suspect would become clear.

Candace Dempsey is a good writer and has done a lot of interesting work on this story. I'll bet she's also a pretty good cook, too. Though I haven't had the pleasure of being able to speak on that from personal experience.