Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[CDHost]

Profiling works, but I don't think it is sufficiently accurate to produce a guilty verdict (>99%). Perhaps profiling is sufficient to determine reasonable doubt (<1%). What do you think?

I think profiling can disprove a theory of the crime and can provide evidence. 5 70/30 pieces of evidence all in agreement get you above 99%. So yes I do consider "fitting the profile" to be some evidence but not a great deal.

The same a physical piece of evidence would be treated. Assuming for example when the split open the knife there is lots of Meredith's DNA under the handle. That makes the knife a weapon which was likely used in the homicide. Not enough to convict for a murder by itself but it shifts the evidence burdon.

A good rule of thumb in my book is 4 pieces of evidence + 1 pieces for every likely conjecture + 2 pieces for every unlikely conjecture. A profile is one piece of evidence.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not sure about opening the knife

Halides1

Do you know whether the defence teams requested the dismantling of the knife in their appeals?

CoulsdonUK,

I do not believe that they did, but I am not 100% certain.

 

[Justinian2]

Its already been established that

a) RS has money
b) The Kerchers likely believe that RS will inherit money.
c) The Kerchers may overestimate the value of their civil suit against AK.

How can a person hire a lawyer without any money after to all the civil and slander suits?

How can a person have money for an appeal if he's sued before the appeal?

Perhaps I don't understand the system. Perhaps it's to extort people to spend all their money on lawyers before they have to pay the findings for slander or civil charges.

Great system, this Italian system. Add to a person's problems while he's trying to defend himself from the planted evidence. Wonderful! The defendant says that the evidence was planted and gets sued again. Doubly wonderful.

Bush perhaps should have invaded Italy rather than Iraq.

 

[Chris C]

How can a person hire a lawyer without any money after to all the civil and slander suits?

How can a person have money for an appeal if he's sued before the appeal?

Perhaps I don't understand the system. Perhaps it's to extort people to spend all their money on lawyers before they have to pay the findings for slander or civil charges.

Great system, this Italian system. Add to a person's problems while he's trying to defend himself from the planted evidence. Wonderful! The defendant says that the evidence was planted and gets sued again. Doubly wonderful.

Bush perhaps should have invaded Italy rather than Iraq.

Italys Government problems aren't because of Italy. They are because of American compromises. Everytime we kick someones rearend in a war, we compromise with them. When we defeated Italy in WW2 we let too many facists remain in power for their support against the war with Germany and the later cold war with the Soviet Union. Thus too many facists remained in power. Resulting with to many facist type laws in Italy's new constitution.

 

[babycondor]

Twenty years ago I gave up drinking, smoking and Republicanism.

For a twenty year stretch, I logged 50,000 miles driving drunk. I never got caught, never had an accident and never got a ticket. I was always super cautious, never weaved in and out of lanes, never drove drunk when children were on the roads and never exceeded the speed limit.

However, I've probably driven a million miles. The last half million miles were without an accident or a guilty finding for a speeding ticket.

Just driving drunk is a victimless crime, in my estimation.

However, driving while seeing double is not good.
...<snip>.

Just because there were no victims of your drunk driving does not make it a victimless crime.

And, how could you possibly know whether children would be on the road when you got behind the wheel in a drunken condition?

The only encouraging thing about your story was that you said you gave up drinking 20 years ago. Except, further along in the thread you stated that you had just had three beers after shoveling snow. So now I think you not only behave foolishly and irresponsibly, but you say things that are not true as well.

 

[Kaosium]

Did you refer to a grown woman as a girl? Guess its ok for guilters.

I do. I go by the definition I was taught growing up: 'young unmarried female.' Also because I find 'woman' and 'female' too clinical.

I 'learned' something different in this one class in college that fulfilled a requirement. To use 'girl' for someone over 18 meant you were 'infantilizing' them, and 'revealed a deep-seated contempt for women' or something like that. As I soon discovered the rather blatant theme of that class was an overt contempt of my 'gender' and all that entailed, I decided I would 'rage, rage against the dying of the light' and would use the words I liked best and if that irritated people who believed the above, all the better.

Thus if anyone chooses to lecture me on what they 'think' my word choices reveal about me and that they are 'offended,' I will ask them for other words that annoy them so I can do so more effectively, and that I think their being offended is little more than as exercise in intolerance and that perhaps they should receive 'sensitivity training' to cure them of their small-minded ways.



Thus to me Amanda is still a 'girl,' as she qualifies in all three particulars.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Quote from RoseMontague:
The bra clasp video was released by someone on the side of innocence, IIRC.

Alt+F4 - Do tell!

PMF had nothing to "release". All of the information they have is readily available to the public. All photographs and crime scene video that was not seen on the news was made available by the "side of innocence". What people need to realize is that those who believe Amanda and Raffaele are innocent want the actual facts presented to the public. When you look at the facts of this case minus all personal opinion on either side, you clearly see that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent.

 

[Kaosium]

To all,

I am reposting a portion of an Andrea Vogt article describing the aftermath of the judges' rebuffing the 2009 request for an independent review, “Immediately after the judge's announcement, Sollecito bowed his head and briefly wept, as lawyers began haggling over court dates for closing arguments.”

A great deal of time has been spent analyzing why Raffaele wrote about the knife in his diary. Perhaps a little bit of time can be spent pondering why he cried when the evidence was not going to be reviewed, and why the prosecution opposed this review. I am still waiting for someone to suggest a better use for this knife.

Very interesting, and here's something I came across recently looking for information about the the knife regarding the appeal:

The defense makes a very important observation regarding Amanda’s DNA on the handle of the knife. If Raffaele's kitchen knife was actually used in the murder, it would have had blood on the handle which would have shown up in later testing. There was a lot of Amanda’s DNA on the handle. The court states that Amanda’s DNA on the handle shows that she used the knife in the murder. How would Meredith’s blood be missing from the same handle if the knife was used to kill Meredith? Cleaning of the knife would remove Meredith’s blood along with Amanda’s DNA. This clearly shows that Amanda’s DNA was deposited on the handle at a different time, most likely when she used the knife to prepare food in Raffaele’s kitchen.

I read through this a long time ago and it didn't dawn on me until re-reading it that the knife couldn't have Amanda's DNA on the handle without also bearing traces of Meredith's blood.

 

[Kaosium]

I read it. It certainly doesn't say anything like you appeared to be claiming was the case, that the decision in Rudy's trial would trump everything else and the defendants might as well give up. Your link appears to be broken BTW.

I'm still looking for a viable answer as to how Amanda and Raffaele could be condemned by the results of Rudy's trial. They had no defense there, how could they be adversely affected? I know Mignini and Maresca said so, but why didn't any of these reporters ask them how this could be, and why they were even bothering with Raffaele and Amanda's appeal if that were the case?

 

[Fine]

Again, where is the evidence that RS himself (not his father) has a very large amount of money?

__________________________________

Alt+F4,

On June 19, 2009, Raffaele's father testified in court that Raffaele had inherited valuable property when Raffaele's mother died. And Raffaele's father testified that she died in 2005, making Raffaele 21 years old at the time. See HERE, see June 20th entry.

///

 

[Alt+F4]

Its already been established that

a) RS has money
b) The Kerchers likely believe that RS will inherit money.
c) The Kerchers may overestimate the value of their civil suit against AK.

Can you provide any evidence for this?

 

[Alt+F4]

__________________________________

Alt+F4,

On June 19, 2009, Raffaele's father testified in court that Raffaele had inherited valuable property when Raffaele's mother died. And Raffaele's father testified that she died in 2005, making Raffaele 21 years old at the time. See HERE, see June 20th entry.

///

I didn't see anything in that link regarding Raffaele inheriting valuable property from his deceased mother.

 

[Malkmus]

I didn't see anything in that link regarding Raffaele inheriting valuable property from his deceased mother.

From the link Fine posted:

Raffaele, the father said economic conditions "wealthy" to have inherited property from his mother died in 2005

 

[Justinian2]

Just because there were no victims of your drunk driving does not make it a victimless crime.

And, how could you possibly know whether children would be on the road when you got behind the wheel in a drunken condition?

The only encouraging thing about your story was that you said you gave up drinking 20 years ago. Except, further along in the thread you stated that you had just had three beers after shoveling snow. So now I think you not only behave foolishly and irresponsibly, but you say things that are not true as well.

Just because Raffaele owned a comic book about rough sex didn't mean he was going to kill someone.

Just because Amanda wrote a story about rape she was going to rape and kill someone.

I only drove drunk after ten at night.

Once when drunk, I was stopped by a police blockade that was checking for drunken drivers. The police asked me how many I had. I lied and said three. Then they asked me to recite the alphabet and let me go.

Now I have three beers once or twice a month and exceed that only once a year on the average.

People that drive drunk don't kill any more people than people that have guns. Just because you own a gun doesn't mean you will kill someone.

Just because Raffaele owned a comic book about rough sex didn't mean he was going to kill someone.

Just because Amanda wrote a story about rape she was going to rape and kill someone.

Too many people jump to conclusions.

 

[Alt+F4]

So your appealling to someones emotion?

Nope, I'm looking at the facts of the case. They are all guilty, AK to a lesser degree. RS and RG actually murdered MK. They are human filth that I hope will rot in prison for many years.

 

[Fine]

I didn't see anything in that link regarding Raffaele inheriting valuable property from his deceased mother.

_______________________

Scroll down the page to the article entitled "MEREDITH: PARENTS IN THE HALL,
DIFENDONO AMANDA E RAFFAELE AMANDA AND RAFFAELE TO DEFEND", dated June 20.

The quote: Raffaele, the father said economic conditions "wealthy" to have inherited property from his mother died in 2005, ....

///

 

[Alt+F4]

From the link Fine posted:

Again, there is no EVIDENCE that RS has even 1 euro. I don't believe anything his father says. If RS owns this property, there are records of his ownership. Where is a title in his name? That's public information.

 

[Alt+F4]

...the father said...

This is not evidence.

 

[Malkmus]

Again, there is no EVIDENCE that RS has even 1 euro. I don't believe anything his father says. If RS owns this property, there are records of his ownership. Where is a title in his name? That's public information.

I don't really care whether he has any money or not. I just know you asked where the info was in the link and helped you find it. But now that I'm in this mess... what is your reason for believing he has no money? I remember reading somewhere that he only had 40 euros in his account at the time of his arrest. Is that what this is about?

 

[Justinian2]

Nope, I'm looking at the facts of the case. They are all guilty, AK to a lesser degree. RS and RG actually murdered MK. They are human filth that I hope will rot in prison for many years.

Throw those verbal stones, won't cha?

RS and RG actually murdered MK.

Enlighten me as to how you've arrived at that conclusion.

Perhaps there was a micro video camera and recorder in the bra clasp that mysteriously appeared along with DNA the day after the footprints were found to have been caused by Rudy?

I can see how a hypothetical miniature video camera would reveal this information to you.