Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kevin_Lowe]

ETA: By the way I'm a huge fan of your sig file; it belongs in a "Rationality Quotes" thread on Less Wrong if it hasn't shown up there already.

The full quote is already there, and I'm P>0.9 that's actually where I got it from, although it's quoted on so many such lists that I can't say for sure.

"Thinking is skilled work. It is not true that we are naturally endowed with the ability to think clearly and logically--without learning how, or without practicing.... People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists."

--Alfred Mander -- Logic for the Millions

 

[komponisto]

Excerpts from Borsini/Belardi

A few choice quotes, with more to come later perhaps:

On Micheli:

We must recognize the first-level judge for his scrupulousness and the logical and legal rigor with which he analyzed all the possible hypotheses, privileging [sorry, couldn't resist -- k.] the one which was most in line with the evidence [risultanze probatorie] that emerged from the investigations, testimony, expert evaluations, and statements of the persons involved; thereby providing, in the opinion of this Court, a correct and well-argued reading of the facts that withstands the equally well-argued critiques put forth by Guede's defense...It is to be remembered that the author of the ruling under appeal is a person of notable experience and one who is regarded as a balanced and professionally prepared person; unsusceptible, therefore, to the enormous ("furious" ["furibonda"]) media pressure surrounding the case emphasized by the defense.

On Meredith (vs. Amanda):

Those who knew her (her English friends; the girls who shared the apartment, the young men of the lower floor) describe her as a discreet, serious, reserved girl who was very linked to her family (Romanelli recounts that she was never away from her cellular phone - one of those found by Alessandro Biscarini in the garden of his house and turned in by his mother to the postal police -- because she was concerned about the health of her mother, with whom she was constantly in contact). All this without being prudish [puritana], even if she sometimes allowed herself a few small transgressions (a few drinks, a puff of a "joint" passed around in a group [una tirata da una "canna" fatta'circolare nel gruppo], some sexual relations with Giacomo Silenzi, as the latter has reported). She differed in this, however, from her roommate Amanda Knox, more impudent [sfrontata] and extroverted, less deferential to rules, sexually uninhibited (Meredith told her friends Robin [sic] Butterworth and Amy Frost of her discomfort [imbarazzo] at having seen condoms and a vibrator in her roommate's beauty case, left in the bathroom in plain view).

On Amanda's naming of Lumumba:

Indeed, if we substitute the figure of Guede for that of Diya Lumumba Patrick, in the slanderous reconstruction of the event made by Amanda...on November 6, that account, otherwise subsequently falsified, would make completely acceptable sense (meeting in Piazza Grimana near the basketball court, looking upon the house frequented by the defendant, who reported passing by there there that very night, probably after having ascertained that his friends from the Marches were not home, and subsequent entrance into the apartment, occupied at that moment only by Kercher, on the part of both of them [i.e. Knox and Guede] and Sollecito, with a less focused recollection [ricordo più sfocato] regarding the presence of the latter).

Given the silence of the person concerned, it cannot be known why Amanda pointed to Diya [sic] instead of Guede, but it is likely that she did so because the latter, unlike the former, would have been able to deny her claim of not participating in the sexual violence and resulting homicide; indicating a person of color, however, in case someone had noticed them heading toward the house or coming out of it together.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Perhaps Komponisto or others can answer this one: Is it legally possible, and does it actually happen, that Italian appeal courts convict based on a highly revised version of the prosecution theory? For example, could they have upheld Rudy's conviction while changing the story to make him the sole killer?

 

[komponisto]

Perhaps Komponisto or others can answer this one: Is it legally possible, and does it actually happen, that Italian appeal courts convict based on a highly revised version of the prosecution theory? For example, could they have upheld Rudy's conviction while changing the story to make him the sole killer?

I don't know the technical legal answer, but the impression I have is that the appeal courts have a great deal of flexibility. At the first level of appeal, the whole case can essentially be retried, according to my understanding. And if judges at the initial level are allowed to come up with their own narrative separately from the prosecution (as Massei and Cristiani did), then I see no reason why judges at the appeal level wouldn't be able to do likewise.

In any event, Borsini and Belardi could certainly have written their opinion more carefully, without rendering verdicts on cases not before them (including not only the main charges against Knox and Sollecito but also the slander charge against Knox regarding Lumumba). In fact, given that Knox and Sollecito's case is separate, they should (and, you would think, would) have written in it in such a way that it could easily stand even if Knox and Sollecito's conviction in overturned. As it is, they may have made the ultimate sustainment of Guede's conviction more difficult than it needed to be.

 

[Chris C]

Its not in a clean room. Which means you have humans shedding about a gram a day of dander which is attracting dust mites which are walking on the drive platters. They aren't wearing clean clothes if they are doing things like that so they are carrying microscopic levels of all sorts of noxious chemicals from the cars that passed them on their way to work.... You aren't going to be able to get that dust off. Now imagine you try and rotate that filthy platter at 5400 or 7200 RPM, which is about twice as fast as inside your car engine.

Most drives are magnetically shielded. The magnet would be have been preferable.

My response concerning the magnet was a joke. I remember watching a movie when I was younger were a cop tossed a industrial sized magnet through a business window. The purpose was so another cop would take it to the evidence locker and place it beside some tapes of the cop on the take. Whenever I think of how these perugian investigators handled the computer, I think of that movie.

 

[Chris C]

Perhaps Komponisto or others can answer this one: Is it legally possible, and does it actually happen, that Italian appeal courts convict based on a highly revised version of the prosecution theory? For example, could they have upheld Rudy's conviction while changing the story to make him the sole killer?

Well that was my point concerning Guede. There is no updated prosecution theory. His case already went to the Supreme and was confirmed as part of a 3 way murder. The prosecutors have had their chance to update it. To the best of my understanding his conviction is based on collaboration between knox, sollecito and guede. His conviction isn't based on collaboration between Guede and 2 unnamed people. However, If Knox and Sollecito get their convictions overturned, Rudy's overturn should quickly follow. Didn't they use testimony from Rudy's appeal against Knox/Sollecito. To the best of my knowledge they have connected the trials together and are trying to connect them at Knox/Sollecito's appeals.

 

[Mary_H]

You're right: I don't see anything wrong with what either Meredith or Knox chose to do (although I wouldn't exactly endorse cannabis use...). I never said anything that in any way implied that I did, but Danceme chose to "interpret" my comments in that way - for reasons that only he or she knows.

I found the original post to be gratuitous and purposely provocative; that's one reason I ignored it. You talked in your post about the fear of people taking your words out of context, but there was no context -- you brought the subject up out of the blue, and seemed to be spoiling for a fight.

After reading the posts that were removed to AAH, I don't agree that Danceme misinterpreted your meaning; she was commenting on your intent, and I don't think she was wrong.

I do see your point, though -- with a slight twist. I think the hypocrisy lies in the fact that the colpevolisti resent the innocentisti for revealing potentially negative information about Meredith, but they don't resent the police and Guede's lawyers for doing the same thing.

 

[RoseMontague]

Two new posts at the SHOCK. The latest deals with the Gossip Squad, those paragons of journalistic virtue that led Curatolo to the cops and are now accusing Amanda of having a phone number.

From any angle we take the report: there’s nothing technical in it, there’s nothing professional. It’s just muck and mire, a modern day lynching, a pure defamation; it’s still the female hate, which is at the source of this dirty story, that keeps on feeding the transparent character assassination of a girl.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2011/01/amanda-knox-was-having-sex-with-guy.html

The other deals with Sabrina Misseri. It seems her father has confirmed that the cops forced him to accuse his daughter of the murder. I am sure the prosecution is going to continue with the charges anyway, but Sabrini may go free before Amanda's appeal is done, in my opinion.

Michele, indeed, from what today leaked, had written a letter to Sabrina. That was right after his first meeting with Coppi, occurred on Christmas eve. A letter in which he explained what we had already easily figured out.
I was forced to accuse you, it seems that the letter said, I was threatened. Really? What a surprise...

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2011/01/truth-emerging-for-sarah.html

 

[katy_did]

Two new posts at the SHOCK. The latest deals with the Gossip Squad, those paragons of journalistic virtue that led Curatolo to the cops and are now accusing Amanda of having a phone number.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2011/01/amanda-knox-was-having-sex-with-guy.html

Wow. More great posts from Frank. I liked this bit:

So, Mignini knows who he can thank if he becomes the most unpopular judge in the world. Keep on believing them, Giuliano. Don’t investigate them. Don’t ask yourself why the November 6 fax was sent. Don’t ask yourself where the DNA comes from. Don’t ask yourself what was the lamp doing there, stuck under Meredith's door. Keep on believing them, Perugia.

I've always thought the most likely explanation for Amanda's lamp being in the room is that the police used it themselves (why is the cable leading out into the corridor in the photos, as if it had been plugged in outside the room, when it wasn't like that when the door was broken down?).

 

[Chris C]

Two new posts at the SHOCK. The latest deals with the Gossip Squad, those paragons of journalistic virtue that led Curatolo to the cops and are now accusing Amanda of having a phone number.



http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2011/01/amanda-knox-was-having-sex-with-guy.html

The other deals with Sabrina Misseri. It seems her father has confirmed that the cops forced him to accuse his daughter of the murder. I am sure the prosecution is going to continue with the charges anyway, but Sabrini may go free before Amanda's appeal is done, in my opinion.



http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2011/01/truth-emerging-for-sarah.html

Yeah I read Franks part about Knox. Seems the Prosecution investigated them for 2 years after finding one of thems number on Knox's cell phone. I wonder how many other people they investigated for 2 years for being on Knox's cell phone. In a way, all Americans should be thanking Italy for all these investigations. Their legal system is dragging down the Euro and helping slow the collapse of our own economy.

 

[katy_did]

BTW, anyone get the impression from his posts over the last month or so that Frank has some new information he's heavily hinting at, but can't reveal just yet...?

If they had put a bit of DNA on the rope the case would have last much more, it could have make it even to the appeal trial... It's not difficult, you just have to rub a t-shirt, something like that, against the item...
They should write me. I could tell them who could teach them the technique.

 

[Chris C]

BTW, anyone get the impression from his posts over the last month or so that Frank has some new information he's heavily hinting at, but can't reveal just yet...?

What are you thinking there was something in the box with the Knife?

I just realized today, that this is the first murder case i have heard of that animal porn was brought into. Anyone know of any other cases where the prosecution accused a suspect of watching animal porn?

 

[katy_did]

What are you thinking there was something in the box with the Knife?

I was thinking more about the bra clasp, and the very convenient discovery of Sollecito's DNA on it (though he might mean the knife instead/as well as). Frank has hinted he has information that the DNA was planted quite a few times in his recent posts, and that he'll reveal this information in good time...

 

[RoseMontague]

BTW, anyone get the impression from his posts over the last month or so that Frank has some new information he's heavily hinting at, but can't reveal just yet...?

It does seem that way. Perhaps he is growing bolder? Some of the posters that seem familiar with the way things work in Italy are concerned he may be getting too specific about things.

 

[bobc]

Just FYI, I am done with this thread. The pro-Knox side can take it from here...

 

[RoseMontague]

Just FYI, I am done with this thread. The pro-Knox side can take it from here...

Yes, you made that clear on the cant we close the amanda knox thread now thread. Good look finding a place with a more civil discussion that includes both sides of the debate. If you find it, I will come, so please let me know.

 

[Supernaut]

So not then a cause for reasonable doubt.

I might be interested in discussing it further with you if you could maintain a civil tone, but you appear incapable of that.

So, your failure to offer any effective argument isn't because you don't have one, but is because KL's "tone" offends you?

Hmmm. OK.

 

[Chris C]

Or that the autopsy evidence is incorrect.

You know bob, Mignini tried that exact thing rather than argue against the Dr. Lalli's stomach content results. His argument was to put a guy on the stand that NEVER watched the autopsy and had him give evidence about what happens if you do autopsy results wrong. So if the Prosecution believed the stomach content results were so wrong, why did they not put someone on the stand that watched the autopsy and have them testify that Dr. Lalli screwed up the autopsy? Why didn't they put someone on the stand that said his numbers for ToD based on stomach contents was wrong? The only logical answer is they couldn't find anyone that would testify that Dr. Lalli screwed up the autopsy. I mean Dr. Lalli was the prosecutions witness, and the prosecution threw him under the bus over his stomach content evidence and attacked his competence, and they did it without putting someone on the stand that watched the autopsy or disputing the results of the stomach contents.

 

[Alt+F4]

Frank has hinted he has information that the DNA was planted quite a few times in his recent posts, and that he'll reveal this information in good time...

Gee, I would think a "good time" would be now....during the appeal! Well maybe he's waiting for his own book deal to close first.

 

[Dan O.]

I've always thought the most likely explanation for Amanda's lamp being in the room is that the police used it themselves (why is the cable leading out into the corridor in the photos, as if it had been plugged in outside the room, when it wasn't like that when the door was broken down?).

I was just looking at the photo of the lamp trapped behind the door with the cord stretched towards the outlet and remembering a recent theory that the lamp scratched the floor when the door was kicked open. The problem with that theory is that the physics don't work. If the lamp was plugged in when the door was violently kicked in, the whole cord would be jerked in the direction of the lamp and not be left strung across the floor. The lamp could have only gotten in that position with the door slowly opened. We know how violently the door was kicked open because part of the lock hardware landed on the duvet.

Given that the cord is stretched across the doorway and noting how it got kicked into the hall by the cops "carefully" steping in and out of the crime scene, there is very little chance that the lamp was behind that door at the time the door was kicked open.


PS: The cord isn't long enough to have been plugged in to any outlet outside the room.