Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
A point of clarification: some news outlets (led, surprisingly, by a newswire operator) misreported that Curatolo had been convicted of heroin dealing. Apparently, this erroneous information was sourced from "a lawyer" in Italy, and it found its way into print in quite a few publications.

However, the original story in the Corriere dell'Umbria stated unequivocally that Curatolo had appeared in court last week (with a named judge) charged with heroin dealing, and that the case had been adjourned until November. There has still been absolutely nothing to refute this story - the subsequent mistake made was that Curatolo had been convicted of the crime, but it appears to remain accurate that he has been charged with the offence, has been arraigned, and will be tried properly in November.

Oh, and the "Italian lawyer" who appears to have passed on the misinformation that Curatolo had actually been convicted hasn't been identified, AFAIC - but some seem to be operating under the assumption that it's Luciano Ghirga (one of Knox's lawyers) deliberately trying to spread disinformation. I don't know whether this is based on anything concrete, or whether it's just rank speculation.....
 
LondonJohn said:
A point of clarification: some news outlets (led, surprisingly, by a newswire operator) misreported that Curatolo had been convicted of heroin dealing. Apparently, this erroneous information was sourced from "a lawyer" in Italy, and it found its way into print in quite a few publications.

However, the original story in the Corriere dell'Umbria stated unequivocally that Curatolo had appeared in court last week (with a named judge) charged with heroin dealing, and that the case had been adjourned until November. There has still been absolutely nothing to refute this story - the subsequent mistake made was that Curatolo had been convicted of the crime, but it appears to remain accurate that he has been charged with the offence, has been arraigned, and will be tried properly in November.

Oh, and the "Italian lawyer" who appears to have passed on the misinformation that Curatolo had actually been convicted hasn't been identified, AFAIC - but some seem to be operating under the assumption that it's Luciano Ghirga (one of Knox's lawyers) deliberately trying to spread disinformation. I don't know whether this is based on anything concrete, or whether it's just rank speculation.....
Click to expand...

Yes, I noticed the reaction to this too and found it somewhat odd. I don't think anyone here thought he was convicted and I don't see how AP erroneously reporting that changes anything at all. It seems that some think it's an excuse to hand wave the whole incident away.
 
LondonJohn said:
Does anyone have any idea why Mr Rag (and others of his ilk) are now putting the length of Knox's night interrogation on 5th/6th November at around 2 hours 45 minutes? I thought the party line was that there was "barely enough time to set the chairs out" before Knox "blurted out" her (false) confession/accusation. But 2.45 hours is of course more than enough time for a progressively coercive approach to have been applied by the surprisingly-numerous-for-a-run-of-the-mill-witness-interview Perugia Flying Squad who were there that night. Has the party line changed....?
Click to expand...

I remember reading here sometime back that with all the shuffling around it would have taken two hours before the actual interrogating actually started. I disagree, especially since we have the officer's notes which started roughly before 11:00PM in the hallway while Amanda was doing homework.
 
RoseMontague said:
I see no evidence that Meredith was anything other than a normal college kid.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any such evidence, however in the 24 hours after her body was discovered the police didn't know that. They seem to have just latched on to whoever was nearest, made up a crazy theory that included them, and then not made any serious attempt to look for evidence that might support alternative hypotheses even though their favoured hypothesis was a huge zebra hypothesis.
 
LondonJohn said:
Does anyone have any idea why Mr Rag (and others of his ilk) are now putting the length of Knox's night interrogation on 5th/6th November at around 2 hours 45 minutes? I thought the party line was that there was "barely enough time to set the chairs out" before Knox "blurted out" her (false) confession/accusation. But 2.45 hours is of course more than enough time for a progressively coercive approach to have been applied by the surprisingly-numerous-for-a-run-of-the-mill-witness-interview Perugia Flying Squad who were there that night. Has the party line changed....?
Click to expand...

Well that may be coming from me. The issue is the time line. There is a timeline on PMF. There is another timeline which comes from head of homicide:

10:40 PM RS + AK arrive at police station for RS to be questioned. He goes in
10:40 PM - 1 AM AK is waiting does her cartwheel, backbend and split
1 AM -- Police determine incorrectly that RS shoe matches bloody footprint and arrest him.
~ 1 AM Napoleoni goes to the vending machine to strike up a conversation about murder. She does not intend to allow Amanda to leave. Napoleoni takes Amanda back to interrogation room
1:45 AM Napoleoni calls in translator and logs Amanda as a suspect. Does not start taping as she should.
1:45- 3:30 Napoleoni turns up the heat. Confronts Amanda about her about text messages. This is when Amanda says she was cuffed twice, called liar.... This is also when Napoleoni says Amanda struck herself.
3:30 Mignini called in.
?? Mignini takes written statement.
5:45 AM Amanda signs police statement

This doesn't agree with the PMF timeline but it actually makes sense.

___

For others I'm adding the PMF timeline for contrast:

Nov 5:
2. 1700 Raffaele summoned to the police station. Amanda goes with him and waits in a separate room.
3. 2000 Candlelight vigil for Meredith.
4. Raffaele "breaks."
5. 1040 (at the earliest - Amanda is talking to Filomena about where to live at 1039) Amanda is called in for formal questioning

Nov 6

6. 0145 Amanda becomes a suspect and the interrogation is halted
7. 0545 Amanda (who still has no lawyer) asks to make a spontaneous declaration. In it, she accuses Patrick Lumumba of the murder and claims to have been in the kitchen while Meredith screamed
8. Amanda & RS jailed; police arrest Patrick
9. Amanda writes a spontaneous testament, in which she claims to have spent the evening with Raffaele, but still confusingly writes: "I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik, but I want to make very clear that these events seem more unreal to me that what I said before, that I stayed at Raffaele's house."
10. Police chief wrongly declares "Caso Chiuso"
 
Last edited:
Some posts moved to AAH.

Other forums are not the topic under discussion. Thanks.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode
 
LondonJohn said:
A point of clarification: some news outlets (led, surprisingly, by a newswire operator) misreported that Curatolo had been convicted of heroin dealing. Apparently, this erroneous information was sourced from "a lawyer" in Italy, and it found its way into print in quite a few publications.

However, the original story in the Corriere dell'Umbria stated unequivocally that Curatolo had appeared in court last week (with a named judge) charged with heroin dealing, and that the case had been adjourned until November. There has still been absolutely nothing to refute this story - the subsequent mistake made was that Curatolo had been convicted of the crime, but it appears to remain accurate that he has been charged with the offence, has been arraigned, and will be tried properly in November.

Oh, and the "Italian lawyer" who appears to have passed on the misinformation that Curatolo had actually been convicted hasn't been identified, AFAIC - but some seem to be operating under the assumption that it's Luciano Ghirga (one of Knox's lawyers) deliberately trying to spread disinformation. I don't know whether this is based on anything concrete, or whether it's just rank speculation.....
Click to expand...
What does this have to do with Amanda Knox's guilt or innocent?
 
vwgub said:
What does this have to do with Amanda Knox's guilt or innocent?
Click to expand...

Curatolo is a witness in the trial of Amanda and Raffaele. He has recently made headlines for reasons that could affect the credibility of testimony he gave. Since this forum discusses the case and upcoming appeals, it's rather apt. You seem to disagree. Could you explain why?
 
Okay ready the last few page of this thread my only question is.

What are you guys talking about?
How are the points you are bringing up in any way relevant to the question of is Amanda Knox guilty or innocent?
 
Malkmus said:
Curatolo is a witness in the trial of Amanda and Raffaele. He has recently made headlines for reasons that could affect the credibility of testimony he gave. Since this forum discusses the case and upcoming appeals, it's rather apt. You seem to disagree. Could you explain why?
Click to expand...

Why do you think I disagree? Oh and by the way this forum does no discuss this case only it discussed a bunch of stuff.
 
vwgub said:
Okay ready the last few page of this thread my only question is.

What are you guys talking about?
How are the points you are bringing up in any way relevant to the question of is Amanda Knox guilty or innocent?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could be more specific. The majority of the topics discussed are related to the upcoming appeals. I agree that the noise violation is irrelevant, but it's something those who think she's guilty find unwilling to let go of. Curatolo, as I've explained, is directly related to the upcoming appeals.
 
vwgub said:
Why do you think I disagree?
Click to expand...

Because you asked why it was relevant to the discussion. Anyone reading the posts related to Curatolo would instantly understand the relation to the case, so asking why we're discussing him is a bit puzzling.

vwgub said:
Oh and by the way this forum does no discuss this case only it discussed a bunch of stuff.
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry, I meant this thread.
 
Malkmus said:
Curatolo is a witness in the trial of Amanda and Raffaele. He has recently made headlines for reasons that could affect the credibility of testimony he gave. Since this forum discusses the case and upcoming appeals, it's rather apt. You seem to disagree. Could you explain why?
Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply. Why would him being a possible drug dealer impeach his testimony?
 
vwgub said:
What does this have to do with Amanda Knox's guilt or innocence?
Click to expand...

The 'conviction' was for a noise ticket at Amanda's going away party. A highly hyperbolic piece published in the UK's Daily Mail was entered into the court record as 'proof' that Amanda was a dangerous sociopath. This 'conviction' was later employed as a primary reason for PM Mignini to appeal the sentence given to Amanda, which is why she now faces a life sentence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom