Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Alt+F4]

Profiling and psychiatric classifications shouldn't be used against Amanda in a court of law.

Profiling does usually help the police narrow down suspects (except in the case of the Craigslist killer), but it does not belong in a court of law.

Characterizing a drunken driver as an accident about to happen falls under the classification of profiling. I won a putting contest by dropping a tricky 60 foot putt while drunk.

All drunken drivers are not fatalities about to happen. Profiling and psychiatric classifications shouldn't be used against Amanda in a court of law.

Wow. I think even those who believe AK and RS are 100% innocent would disagree with your "attempt" at logic here.

 

[Draca]

The Kerchers

I am not a fan of John Kercher. His Support of the effort to incarcerate and vilify Amanda, Raffaele and their families recasts John Kercher from the role of grieving father to villain.

I would say it makes him a victim.

A victim of trusting their lawyer Francesco Maresca, who was probably suggested to them by Mignini or someone else on the prosecution team.

A victim of trusting the police, forensic team and prosecutors who have handled the investigation and trial.

A victim of hatred toward the people he believes killed his daughter.

A victim of hatred for the family always on tv defending a person he believes killed his daughter.

A victim of having his daughter murdered and taken away from him most of all.


The whole Kercher family have been victimized twice. First their daughter Meredith is murdered. Then they are put through years of a ridiculous trial that they trusted to give them the correct result.

How are they going to feel if Amanda and Raffaele win their appeal? If they accept their release as correct they will realize their daughters killer will be out in only a few years and the Perugian justice system really messed up. They will also realize Amanda and Raffaele spent years in jail for killing their daughter when they were not involved. And that their own lawyer helped in putting innocent people behind bars and that the whole trial was a painful disaster.

If they do not accept the turning over the conviction as correct, they will likely be bitter and angry that people they think killed their daughter got away with it. Either way a turn over of the conviction causes the Kerchers pain.



Have the Kerchers played a role in the debacle?

John Kercher worked in the tabloid industry in the UK. They may have attacked Amanda hard as a way of revenging damage done to one of their own. Did JK play an active role though? Probably not. Foxy Knoxy was created early on and he would have been with his family in grief at that time.

The civil suit during the trial was awful. They were probably just following their lawyers advise though. Broken_English, an Italian poster, said the hiring of a lawyer and civil suit is considered a hostile act toward the defendents.

One thing I don't understand is in the first version of his Daily Mail article Rudy Guede was not even mentioned. He was designated as - and a third person also in jail. Even if JK thinks all 3 were involved, why did he gives RG's roll so little importance that he didn't even mention his name. It was like he blamed Amanda primarily and RG was just there in the background not really that involved.

I think John Kercher wants the people he thinks killed his daughter punished and for the whole thing to be over. I don't think Raffaele's money is his goal more than a way to punish them.

I do think his lawyer Maresca has his eyes on that money though.

 

[Justinian2]

Wow. I think even those who believe AK and RS are 100% innocent would disagree with your "attempt" at logic here.

Do you believe that profiling should be used in a court of law?

I think profiling is important and statistically correct, but I don't think profiling is of sufficient quality to be considered 'evidence'.

 

[Justinian2]

I would say it makes him a victim.

A victim of trusting their lawyer Francesco Maresca, who was probably suggested to them by Mignini or someone else on the prosecution team.

A victim of trusting the police, forensic team and prosecutors who have handled the investigation and trial.

A victim of hatred toward the people he believes killed his daughter.

A victim of hatred for the family always on tv defending a person he believes killed his daughter.

A victim of having his daughter murdered and taken away from him most of all.


The whole Kercher family have been victimized twice. First their daughter Meredith is murdered. Then they are put through years of a ridiculous trial that they trusted to give them the correct result.

How are they going to feel if Amanda and Raffaele win their appeal? If they accept their release as correct they will realize their daughters killer will be out in only a few years and the Perugian justice system really messed up. They will also realize Amanda and Raffaele spent years in jail for killing their daughter when they were not involved. And that their own lawyer helped in putting innocent people behind bars and that the whole trial was a painful disaster.

If they do not accept the turning over the conviction as correct, they will likely be bitter and angry that people they think killed their daughter got away with it. Either way a turn over of the conviction causes the Kerchers pain.

Have the Kerchers played a role in the debacle?

John Kercher worked in the tabloid industry in the UK. They may have attacked Amanda hard as a way of revenging damage done to one of their own. Did JK play an active role though? Probably not. Foxy Knoxy was created early on and he would have been with his family in grief at that time.

The civil suit during the trial was awful. They were probably just following their lawyers advise though. Broken_English, an Italian poster, said the hiring of a lawyer and civil suit is considered a hostile act toward the defendents.

One thing I don't understand is in the first version of his Daily Mail article Rudy Guede was not even mentioned. He was designated as - and a third person also in jail. Even if JK thinks all 3 were involved, why did he gives RG's roll so little importance that he didn't even mention his name. It was like he blamed Amanda primarily and RG was just there in the background not really that involved.

I think John Kercher wants the people he thinks killed his daughter punished and for the whole thing to be over. I don't think Raffaele's money is his goal more than a way to punish them.

I do think his lawyer Maresca has his eyes on that money though.

John Kercher worked in the tabloid industry in the UK. They may have attacked Amanda hard as a way of revenging damage done to one of their own

That is interesting. Perhaps that accounts for some of JK's prejudice.

I don't think the justice system is a friend of the Kercher family nor do I think the guilters are friends of the Kercher family. The tabloids are not friends of the Kercher family either.

The families of Amanda Knox and Raffaele are potentially the best friends and perhaps the only friends of the Kercher family.

 

[lionking]

The families of Amanda Knox and Raffaele are potentially the best friends and perhaps the only friends of the Kercher family.

By what sort of twisted logic do you come to this ridiculous conclusion?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Let's assume for the sake of discussion that Guede's final motivational report stated that he along with unnamed assailants was responsible for Meredith murder, would the defence be able to argue against the ruling of the highest court in Italy?

 

[Justinian2]

I don't think he is advocating it, I think he doesn't beleive it's a big deal. He is totally wrong.

I put that in in the category of profiling.

Point me to the thread that was discussing the victimless crime. I like having people try to serve my head to me on a silver platter - as long as it isn't a court of law. I try to pre-emptively fight the courts and suck up to them from within.

I consider that my involvement on this thread is part of a pre-emptive strike on the arrogance of the courts.

 

[Withnail1969]

Let's assume for the sake of discussion that Guede's final motivational report stated that he along with unnamed assailants was responsible for Meredith murder, would the defence be able to argue against the ruling of the highest court in Italy?

Didn't you already ask this exact same question yesterday? The two cases are separate. Guede's motivations report cannot be used as evidence in Knox and Sollecito's case.

If that were possible, they would already be free because the Micheli report gives them an alibi.

Why do you keep asking the same question?

edit to add - not yesterday, 23rd of January you were asking the same question. What's the point of that?

 

[Justinian2]

By what sort of twisted logic do you come to this ridiculous conclusion?

If I didn't just have three beers after shoveling out from the newest accumulation of snow, I might think that was an insult.

The premises behind my logic are:
1) Amanda and Raffaele are totally innocent.
2) The families of Amanda, Raffaele, and Meredith are all victims.
3) Rudy is the lone wolf and acted alone.

If one of my premises is wrong, then my conclusion is also wrong (but not twisted logic or a ridiculous conclusion)

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Didn't you already ask this exact same question yesterday? The two cases are separate. Guede's motivations report cannot be used as evidence in Knox and Sollecito's case.

If that were possible, they would already be free because the Micheli report gives them an alibi.

Why do you keep asking the same question?

edit to add - not yesterday, 23rd of January you were asking the same question. What's the point of that?

Whitenail

The difference now is that Guede's appeals have been exhausted and as such he is guilty, therefore, the context of my question is different to his trial and subsequent appeals. Indeed, because of the confirmation are his trail records, evidence accessible to the defence and prosecution teams.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Whitenail

The difference now is that Guede's appeals have been exhausted and as such he is guilty, therefore, the context of my question is different to his trial and subsequent appeals. Indeed, because of the confirmation are his trail records, evidence accessible to the defence and prosecution teams.

Sorry Withnail1969 spelt your name incorrectly.

 

[Withnail1969]

Whitenail

The difference now is that Guede's appeals have been exhausted and as such he is guilty, therefore, the context of my question is different to his trial and subsequent appeals. Indeed, because of the confirmation are his trail records, evidence accessible to the defence and prosecution teams.

As far as I understand, it wouldn't be usable. It would be a gross breach of the principles of natural justice if it were.

Imagine you're on trial trying to defend yourself, and the judge says 'you may as well plead guilty because the decision in this other trial, at which you were not present or represented, says you participated in the murder'.

Do you see how ridiculous that would be?

 

[lionking]

If I didn't just have three beers after shoveling out from the newest accumulation of snow, I might think that was an insult.

The premises behind my logic are:
1) Amanda and Raffaele are totally innocent.
2) The families of Amanda, Raffaele, and Meredith are all victims.
3) Rudy is the lone wolf and acted alone.

If one of my premises is wrong, then my conclusion is also wrong (but not twisted logic or a ridiculous conclusion)

Er, the bit about Amanda's family being the only friends of the Kerchers? How on earth does that follow, even if your premises are correct (which I don't accept)?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

As far as I understand, it wouldn't be usable. It would be a gross breach of the principles of natural justice if it were.

Imagine you're on trial trying to defend yourself, and the judge says 'you may as well plead guilty because the decision in this other trial, at which you were not present or represented, says you participated in the murder'.

Do you see how ridiculous that would be?

Withnail1969

Well the context is the Italian judicial system. There was 2 separate trials but one police investigation and notwithstanding yours and others belief in Raffaele and Amanda's innocence, they were all charged with exactly the same Penal Codes. Media reports on whether evidence or the ruling of the higher court can be used was as usual conflicting, like you I do not know the answer but I was hoping that someone with an understanding of the Italian system might know the answer. Given the timing of Guede's final appeal the motivational report will be published before the DNA re-examination findings.

 

[Withnail1969]

Withnail1969

Well the context is the Italian judicial system. There was 2 separate trials but one police investigation and notwithstanding yours and others belief in Raffaele and Amanda's innocence, they were all charged with exactly the same Penal Codes. Media reports on whether evidence or the ruling of the higher court can be used was as usual conflicting, like you I do not know the answer but I was hoping that someone with an understanding of the Italian system might know the answer. Given the timing of Guede's final appeal the motivational report will be published before the DNA re-examination findings.

My answer is the right one. There is no judicial system in the world in a modern democracy which would operate as you describe.

 

[Alt+F4]

I put that in in the category of profiling.

Point me to the thread that was discussing the victimless crime. I like having people try to serve my head to me on a silver platter - as long as it isn't a court of law. I try to pre-emptively fight the courts and suck up to them from within.

I consider that my involvement on this thread is part of a pre-emptive strike on the arrogance of the courts.

Let me put it this way: drunk driving is not a victimless crime. You will find NO ONE on this thread, or on any thread in any sub-forum of the JREF forums that will agree with you except for the fool that suggested it originally.

It is beyond ridiculous to make any type of comparison between the case we are discussing and drunk driving as a victimless crime.

As for finding the thread I mentioned, use the search function.

 

[Justinian2]

Er, the bit about Amanda's family being the only friends of the Kerchers? How on earth does that follow, even if your premises are correct (which I don't accept)?

I see your point. The word 'only' is a bit of a stretch.

I think that JK, were he to accept the premise of innocence, would/should realize that Amanda, Raffaele and their families have also suffered. The guilters and tabloids have NOT suffered.

 

[Justinian2]

Let me put it this way: drunk driving is not a victimless crime. You will find NO ONE on this thread, or on any thread in any sub-forum of the JREF forums that will agree with you except for the fool that suggested it originally.

It is beyond ridiculous to make any type of comparison between the case we are discussing and drunk driving as a victimless crime.

As for finding the thread I mentioned, use the search function.

You are talking about a statistical correlation, not an absolute certainty.

The correlation, I believe, is that people in the profiled condition are twice as likely to cause a fatal accident. There is NOT a 100% certainty that the people in the profiled condition will cause a fatal accident.

However, doing cartwheels [by Amanda] at a police station does not have any correlation to causing a fatal crime at all.

 

[Onofarar]

Hi mary -

Yes 2 million is a LOT - about the same as in US dollars.

Maresca be barking mad for all we know.

Actually at today's exchange rates it is $2.75 million US.
At the time of the award the Euro was strnger - probably worth almost $3 million then

 

[Withnail1969]

Actually at today's exchange rates it is $2.75 million US.
At the time of the award the Euro was strnger - probably worth almost $3 million then

The judicial system is going to be used as a weapon to extort a very large amount of money from the Sollecito family. It's as brutally simple as that.