Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Supernaut]

A commentator elsewhere (anonymous) had this to say during a discussion of the misuse/abuse of police and judical power;

"I think we have evolved very little from our medieval ancestors – we don’t need the stocks anymore, we can humiliate and torture people far more effectively today with vicious stories and mass-endorsed lies. My own view is that there is a deep and addictive form of obscene enjoyment at work in destroying people who have done well with their lives, simply for being revealed as human. And it is the descent from relative security, prosperity and prestige – often very hard won – into reviled and scapegoated social waste that gives the ignorant, illiterate petty officials who preside over such destruction the charge of enjoyment that no salary could ever match."

Indeed.

 

[RoseMontague]

A commentator elsewhere (anonymous) had this to say during a discussion of the misuse/abuse of police and judical power;

"I think we have evolved very little from our medieval ancestors – we don’t need the stocks anymore, we can humiliate and torture people far more effectively today with vicious stories and mass-endorsed lies. My own view is that there is a deep and addictive form of obscene enjoyment at work in destroying people who have done well with their lives, simply for being revealed as human. And it is the descent from relative security, prosperity and prestige – often very hard won – into reviled and scapegoated social waste that gives the ignorant, illiterate petty officials who preside over such destruction the charge of enjoyment that no salary could ever match."

Indeed.

That is a great quote. It is a shame that the poster did not put their name out there.

 

[CDHost]

The family of the murder victim did not ask for this case to be handled privately. They were perfectly OK with a massive PR campaign. If in 2007 there were petitioning for a quick plea bargain so that everyone could get on with their lives that would be one thing. But they felt perfectly OK with a campaign on demonization. They like Mignini are unhappy this has turned into a fair fight with the defense actually hitting back in the public sphere. Usually the accused doesn't have a public network of support.

CDHost,

You are mistaken......

"The trial of two former lovers charged with the murder of British student Meredith Kercher will be held in public, an Italian judge ruled today.

* * *

A lawyer for Kercher's family sought to have the proceedings closed to the public and media to prevent the publication of sensitive evidence and protect the victim's dignity, but the presiding judge ruled the trial would remain open." Guardian January 16, 2009

///

Fine --

That's not the same thing at all. The Kercher's sought a full on trial, all the negative PR, but didn't want a public hearing of the evidence. They sought a one sided presentation. If they really wanted this quiet they don't push for a private trial they push for a low plea bargain and a closed court.

Again I don't know Italian law. But the US equivalent would be you push the DA to plea down to aggravated assault and have everything sealed. When you sue the perpetrators you settle for a huge fee if details ever leak. What they are asking for is essentially that they get get to beat on Amanda and Raffaele and she not be allowed to defend herself or hit back.

 

[CDHost]

A commentator elsewhere (anonymous) had this to say ...

I'll agree with you and Rose, great quote.

 

[Agatha]

I don't think Italy has the sort of plea-bargaining arrangement that you are envisioning, CDHost. http://www.canestrinilex.it/eng/risorse/trial.html

The Kerchers have no right to push for plea bargaining, and their request for a closed court was, as noted above, refused. They, unlike the Knoxes, have not engaged a PR firm, and have endeavoured to stay out of the limelight. Their commentary has been limited to accepting the Italian courts' verdicts. Whilst it might suit your purposes to suggest that they have engaged in demonising Ms Knox, Mr Sollecito and Mr Guede; that has not been the case other than to say publicly that they feel that the right people are incarcerated.

 

[Onofarar]

Dr Stefonia Totally incompetant - forget the fact that she is #1 forensic scientist in Italy

Good point - from now on its Dr. HFCB.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Fine --

That's not the same thing at all. The Kercher's sought a full on trial, all the negative PR, but didn't want a public hearing of the evidence. They sought a one sided presentation. If they really wanted this quiet they don't push for a private trial they push for a low plea bargain and a closed court.

Again I don't know Italian law. But the US equivalent would be you push the DA to plea down to aggravated assault and have everything sealed. When you sue the perpetrators you settle for a huge fee if details ever leak. What they are asking for is essentially that they get get to beat on Amanda and Raffaele and she not be allowed to defend herself or hit back.

Are you suggesting the Kercher family orchestrated the negative media reports during the police investigation? I am aware of a handful of interviews since Meredith’s murder, as a family they have stayed relatively below the media radar. As for the civil case which ran concurrently with the murder trial as far as I know the civil case is aimed at anyone who is found guilty of murdering their daughter\sister so far that is Guede, Raffaele and Amanda with the latter 2 pending their appeal.

If you are able can provide any independent information that the murder victim’s family have demonised Amanda, Guede or Raffaele in the media?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Mr. Kercher went public

I don't think Italy has the sort of plea-bargaining arrangement that you are envisioning, CDHost. http://www.canestrinilex.it/eng/risorse/trial.html

The Kerchers have no right to push for plea bargaining, and their request for a closed court was, as noted above, refused. They, unlike the Knoxes, have not engaged a PR firm, and have endeavoured to stay out of the limelight. Their commentary has been limited to accepting the Italian courts' verdicts. Whilst it might suit your purposes to suggest that they have engaged in demonising Ms Knox, Mr Sollecito and Mr Guede; that has not been the case other than to say publicly that they feel that the right people are incarcerated.

Agatha,

Recently Mr. Kercher went public with his thoughts, and not for the first time. Beyond noting that your description is not accurate, I do not care to discuss his views, except via PM or email.

I think it is worth mentioning that Mr. Maresca is the one who asked Andrew Seliber about Amanda's sex life in Washington state, an inappropriate question, in my view. It is also Mr. Maresca who said in December of 2009 that Italy was showing the world how to do forensics, an astonishing display of humbuggery.

 

[Withnail1969]

Are you suggesting the Kercher family orchestrated the negative media reports during the police investigation? I am aware of a handful of interviews since Meredith’s murder, as a family they have stayed relatively below the media radar. As for the civil case which ran concurrently with the murder trial as far as I know the civil case is aimed at anyone who is found guilty of murdering their daughter\sister so far that is Guede, Raffaele and Amanda with the latter 2 pending their appeal.

If you are able can provide any independent information that the murder victim’s family have demonised Amanda, Guede or Raffaele in the media?

John Kercher hasn't been shy about announcing his belief in the ludicrous Massei report, dodgy witnesses, contradictions, illogical leaps of faith and cherrypicking evidence notwithstanding.

It all boils down to money. The Kerchers and Maresca have a big investment in Amanda and Raffaele being found guilty, but mainly Raffaele. He's worth 2 million euros in his own right, and they want it. Hence the opposition to opening up the knife, or anything else aimed at getting to the truth of this case.

 

[katy_did]

Filomena About room being a mess

Out of interest, do we know what Filomena actually said about that? I haven't been able to find much about the state of the room, its tidiness etc.

As to the rest, I think the key question is whether you would be able to make a similar list for all wrongful convictions. Surely in any case where innocent people are convicted, there's a huge number of people involved in those convictions on the prosecution side, in the judicial system and in the police? Also, it's often not about the evidence itself, but about the way it's interpreted. For example, Stefanoni may well be right about Amanda's DNA being in her bathroom, but the issue is the judge's interpretation of that finding, not the fact of it. Nara may be right that she heard something that night (though I think she's definitely exaggerated it) but it was quite likely unrelated to the murder.

 

[Agatha]

Agatha,

Recently Mr. Kercher went public with his thoughts, and not for the first time. Beyond noting that your description is not accurate, I do not care to discuss his views, except via PM or email.

I think it is worth mentioning that Mr. Maresca is the one who asked Andrew Seliber about Amanda's sex life in Washington state, an inappropriate question, in my view. It is also Mr. Maresca who said in December of 2009 that Italy was showing the world how to do forensics, an astonishing display of humbuggery.

I hardly think two interviews, one prior to the trial and one recently, can be compared with the PR circuit of chat shows and interviews that Ms Knox's supporters have given over the years since Mr Kercher's beloved daughter was horribly murdered.

I prefer to conduct any discussion of the case in open forums; I see no reason to discuss anything in private as I would not say anything in private that I would not be prepared to say on the boards. If you do not wish to discuss Mr Kercher's views, there is no necessity for you to do so.

Mr Maresca's questions and interviews were not the subject of my reply to CDHost.

 

[billyryan]

But surely in the case of any wrongful conviction a similarly sized list could be drawn up. Look at the Guildford Four or the Birmingham Six. Massive cases which went to appeal - there must have been hundreds of police, court officials, witnesses and scientists involved with both.

This attempt to say 'well of course they are guilty, look at all these people who would have to be wrong or lying if they're innocent' simply doesn't work unless you believe no wrongful convictions have ever occurred. It's a non-argument.

Withnail have you any knowledge of any consequences for the people who orchestrated those miscarriages of justice.I followed those cases in the last few years before their release I distinctly remember campaigners in those cases,stating that the police knew well the people they got convicted were innocent.No consequences as far as I am concerned is an incitement to have more miscarriages of justice

 

[Withnail1969]

Withnail have you any knowledge of any consequences for the people who orchestrated those miscarriages of justice.I followed those cases in the last few years before their release I distinctly remember campaigners in those cases,stating that the police knew well the people they got convicted were innocent.No consequences as far as I am concerned is an incitement to have more miscarriages of justice

As far as I know there were no consequences for any of the officials involved in these two cases. The crimes were so horrific that it was as though the UK was in a frenzy to convict somebody and unfortunately these Irish people were in the wrong place at the wrong time. For a long time I myself just assumed they were guilty until I ended up with an Irish girlfriend who educated me about the whole Northern Ireland issue.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I hardly think two interviews, one prior to the trial and one recently, can be compared with the PR circuit of chat shows and interviews that Ms Knox's supporters have given over the years since Mr Kercher's beloved daughter was horribly murdered.

I prefer to conduct any discussion of the case in open forums; I see no reason to discuss anything in private as I would not say anything in private that I would not be prepared to say on the boards. If you do not wish to discuss Mr Kercher's views, there is no necessity for you to do so.

Mr Maresca's questions and interviews were not the subject of my reply to CDHost.

To be strict, those were no interviews. John Kercher wrote two (or more) articles, have you read them?
Do you think it's inappropriate that Amanda's family proclaim her innocence and defend her good name with all their might? She's a beloved daughter, too.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Out of interest, do we know what Filomena actually said about that? I haven't been able to find much about the state of the room, its tidiness etc.

As to the rest, I think the key question is whether you would be able to make a similar list for all wrongful convictions. Surely in any case where innocent people are convicted, there's a huge number of people involved in those convictions on the prosecution side, in the judicial system and in the police? Also, it's often not about the evidence itself, but about the way it's interpreted. For example, Stefanoni may well be right about Amanda's DNA being in her bathroom, but the issue is the judge's interpretation of that finding, not the fact of it. Nara may be right that she heard something that night (though I think she's definitely exaggerated it) but it was quite likely unrelated to the murder.

Alt-F4 included in her list individuals on whom there's already consensus they were wrong. She also added people she herself acknowledges are wrong. That's quite a demagogical way of arguing.

 

[Agatha]

To be strict, those were no interviews. John Kercher wrote two (or more) articles, have you read them?

Yes.

Do you think it's inappropriate that Amanda's family proclaim her innocence and defend her good name with all their might? She's a beloved daughter, too.

No, I don't think it's inappropriate, though I think the xenophobia that some have displayed doesn't help their case in Europe.

I was responding to CDHost's assertion that the Kerchers had a PR machine working for them, and his assertions about the Italian justice system with regard to plea bargains.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I hardly think two interviews, one prior to the trial and one recently, can be compared with the PR circuit of chat shows and interviews that Ms Knox's supporters have given over the years since Mr Kercher's beloved daughter was horribly murdered.

I prefer to conduct any discussion of the case in open forums; I see no reason to discuss anything in private as I would not say anything in private that I would not be prepared to say on the boards. If you do not wish to discuss Mr Kercher's views, there is no necessity for you to do so.

Mr Maresca's questions and interviews were not the subject of my reply to CDHost.

The Kercher family remained quiet throughout the trial and only commented after the verdict. Mr Kercher’s recent article highlighted the minor celebrity status afforded Amanda by the media. My interpretation was of a parent who wanted to remind the media that his daughter had been brutally murdered and effects that has had on Meredith’s Mother, siblings, wider family and friends. Mr Kercher wrote of the joy and pain of his daughter Stephanie receiving Meredith’s posthumous degree from Leeds University and the standing ovation she received, very moving. Unsurprisingly he accepts the verdict of those convicted and stated his family had never been contacted by Amanda parents to offer their condolences.

Interestingly, Amanda for the first time publicly acknowledged the pain that the Kercher family have been through since Meredith’s brutal murder during her spontaneous statement to the appeal court.

I have been completely stunned by the Kercher family’s quiet dignity, quite remarkable.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I hardly think two interviews, one prior to the trial and one recently, can be compared with the PR circuit of chat shows and interviews that Ms Knox's supporters have given over the years since Mr Kercher's beloved daughter was horribly murdered.

I prefer to conduct any discussion of the case in open forums; I see no reason to discuss anything in private as I would not say anything in private that I would not be prepared to say on the boards. If you do not wish to discuss Mr Kercher's views, there is no necessity for you to do so.

Mr Maresca's questions and interviews were not the subject of my reply to CDHost.

The Kercher family remained quiet throughout the trial and only commented after the verdict. Mr Kercher’s recent article highlighted the minor celebrity status afforded Amanda by the media. My interpretation was of a parent who wanted to remind the media that his daughter had been brutally murdered and effects that has had on Meredith’s Mother, siblings, wider family and friends. Mr Kercher wrote of the joy and pain of his daughter Stephanie receiving Meredith’s posthumous degree from Leeds University and the standing ovation she received, very moving. Unsurprisingly he accepts the verdict of those convicted and stated his family had never been contacted by Amanda parents to offer their condolences.

Interestingly, Amanda for the first time publicly acknowledged the pain that the Kercher family have been through since Meredith’s brutal murder during her spontaneous statement to the appeal court.

I have been completely stunned by the Kercher family’s quiet dignity, quite remarkable.

 

[Withnail1969]

Unsurprisingly he accepts the verdict of those convicted.

Has anyone told him that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent until their final appeal?

 

[Alt+F4]

As to the rest, I think the key question is whether you would be able to make a similar list for all wrongful convictions. Surely in any case where innocent people are convicted, there's a huge number of people involved in those convictio ns on the prosecution side, in the judicial system and in the police?

An interesting question and one that woul take a lot of research I would think. The only cases we can be certain are wrongful convictions would involve DNA evidence (or a smoking gun, such as in the Lindy Chamberlain cas). I wonder how many of the 100+ exonerationshad evidence other than DNA and victim testimony?