Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[pilot padron]

It's because you didn't actually read the links Chris listed for you.

Tolerant of the interruption, and again utterly amazed at the incredibly perceptive abilities possessed to enable you to state so dogmatically what another has done or has not done, please do show/tell me how this quoted link provided to me below in any way documents a spontaneous statement in court

pilot padron,


In a story I previously linked, Marco Giannangeli wrote, "He claimed: 'This witness could not have seen me with Rudy Guede because as I have already said I do not know Rudy Guede and I have never met him before in my life.
I do not see how this could refer to any other trial date besides 28 March 2009. By my reckoning, this gives a minimum of four spontaneous declarations.

"wrote" hyperlink expanded = http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91828Kercher-trial-witness-I-saw-lovers-close-to-murder-house-#ixzz1HtZpQKXA"

So I respectfully must ask, and not dogmatically declare...did *you* read the link 'Chris ?" provided ??

With that, cognizant of my possibly justifiably induced 'who cares' reaction from others, and having accepted an appetizer of crow before, I withdraw from the 2, 4 or more, meaning "several" and thank "Chris" for his time, research, information and courtesies.

 

[Chris C]

I prefer to wait until May 21st and see what the experts actually testify to.

My question is, what happens after May 21st? Is that the end of the appeal?

To the best of my understanding, either on May 21st or the next court date, the Judge will start ruling on parts of the appeal. The judge still hasn't ruled on all the other tests the defense has asked for. Instead all those have been reserved for later. In other words, the judge will start making rulings after getting the 1st set of dna results requested by the court.

Though I no very little of how the italian court system works, the judge did mention about ordering this independant review to remove reasonable doubt. Someone might be able to provide you with a better quote. That being said, if what we are hearing is true, there might not be another court date after May 21st. Unless the lab backs the dna results by Stefanoni's lab, then the judge has reasonable doubt to overturn the conviction. Tossing DNA evidence would be a death blow to the case.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Saul Kassin link

Kassin wrote, "Indeed, Gudjonsson and MacKeith (1982) suggested that this type of confession was the product of 'memory distrust syndrome,' a form of source amnesia in which people develop a profound distrust of their memory, rendering them vulnerable to influence from external cues and suggestions." bolding mine

IIRC, Stilicho and others argued that Amanda's amnesia was due to drug use. I do not subscribe to that view.

 

[HumanityBlues]

May I respectfully re arrange your interesting observation to read....

"And yet those who consider this to be totally plausible *may* indeed be crazy"


Is it really sane to see an Anti American conspiracy *as stated in the post*....... ....
......"to include every Italian and their second cousins"

That's not what I was referring to.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Tolerant of the interruption, and again utterly amazed at the incredibly perceptive abilities possessed to enable you to state so dogmatically what another has done or has not done, please do show/tell me how this quoted link provided to me below in any way documents a spontaneous statement in court



"wrote" hyperlink expanded = http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91828Kercher-trial-witness-I-saw-lovers-close-to-murder-house-#ixzz1HtZpQKXA"

So I respectfully must ask, and not dogmatically declare...did *you* read the link 'Chris ?" provided ??

With that, cognizant of my possibly justifiably induced 'who cares' reaction from others, and having accepted an appetizer of crow before, I withdraw from the 2, 4 or more, meaning "several" and thank "Chris" for his time, research, information and courtesies.

pilot, it's enough to read the first link halides1 provided to know that you're wrong.
I'm getting an impression you're not interested in a honest and open discussion.
You're not scoring any points, either.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Kassin wrote, "Indeed, Gudjonsson and MacKeith (1982) suggested that this type of confession was the product of 'memory distrust syndrome,' a form of source amnesia in which people develop a profound distrust of their memory, rendering them vulnerable to influence from external cues and suggestions." bolding mine

IIRC, Stilicho and others argued that Amanda's amnesia was due to drug use. I do not subscribe to that view.

Cops undermined her confidence in her memory - it is very clear from the 6 Nov note she wrote. Their tactics were well explained in her trial testimony.

 

[piktor]

Piktor,

It is a cheap, easily-replaceable knife, if I am not mistaken.

Yes, a common knife. How would it look if, of all people, either Knox or Sollecito went about town buying a large kitchen knife to replace the discarded one. You must remember they were being followed by investigators. It was a long weekend, a very small town, few shops to buy one.

They were stuck with the knife, so they washed and brushed it as best they could and put it back in the drawer with the other twokitchen knives and silverware, also belonging to the rented apartment.

 

[colonelhall]

Excellent article from Barbie Nadeau:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...ppeal-homeless-mans-contradictory-testimony/#

There has been so much written about Saturday's events, but most of it in such sensationalist style that it was impossible to know what to make of it. So refreshing to read an unbiased account from a reporter who was actually there.

Seeing as this is such a high profile case, I wonder how many reporters they can actually fit into the courtroom. Do they have to draw lots? It would be most upsetting for the likes of Candace Dempsey to make the journey and not get in. I do hope that she got a good seat and was not subjected to some of the aggro from Clans Sollecito and Knox. I have always found her quite sympathetic towards their case.

 

[RWVBWL]

Yes, a common knife. How would it look if, of all people, either Knox or Sollecito went about town buying a large kitchen knife to replace the discarded one. You must remember they were being followed by investigators. It was a long weekend, a very small town, few shops to buy one.

They were stuck with the knife, so they washed and brushed it as best they could and put it back in the drawer with the other twokitchen knives and silverware, also belonging to the rented apartment.

Hi piktor,
here's were we differ...

Being as I grew up in a beachside ghetto-by-the-sea back in the 70's, I have done a few things that I don't like to mention which possibly might give me more insight into how a criminal mind works. And I am not nearly 1/8 as bad as some of the others I knew growin' up...

I tell ya piktor, NO guilty person is gonna take home that ordinary, run-of-the-mill kitchen knife because they are worried that the landlord might someday find it missing from the apartments itemized list...

Why not just discard it and in the future just tell the landlord its handle broke while cutting food for cooking?

If Raffaele and Amanda were in any way whatsoever guilty of involvement in Meredith Kercher's murder, they would have replaced it immediately with another one. I doubt it would even have had to have been the same exact cheap brand, since NO landlord is gonna keep the make and model # of any average kitchen knife!

So how could Raf and Amanda have done so?

Easy.
They could have awoken early the next day, Saturday morning, left town and went on that trip to Gubbio which they had planned to do the day before.
They already had a reason to go on it, since it was cancelled due to Miss Kercher's death. Raffaele could have easily discarded that kitchen knife and bought another one to replace it. With them being out of town, no one would have realized what they were doing if they were guilty of involvement in Meredith's bloody murder.

I also doubt that on the morning of Nov. 3, 2007, Raffaele and Amanda were even being followed yet, as you put it. But if they were, and they had left town to go on that cancelled trip and were of a guilty conscience, well I would bet that they would have been suspicious of any car that folllowed them everywhere they went. Wouldn't you?
_________________________________________________________________

Piktor,
say that you had murdered Miss Kercher.
Are you gonna bring that knife home, wash it and just replace it?
Just because your landlord might notice it missing?
Really?...
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Excellent article from Barbie Nadeau:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...ppeal-homeless-mans-contradictory-testimony/#

There has been so much written about Saturday's events, but most of it in such sensationalist style that it was impossible to know what to make of it. So refreshing to read an unbiased account from a reporter who was actually there.

Seeing as this is such a high profile case, I wonder how many reporters they can actually fit into the courtroom. Do they have to draw lots? It would be most upsetting for the likes of Candace Dempsey to make the journey and not get in. I do hope that she got a good seat and was not subjected to some of the aggro from Clans Sollecito and Knox. I have always found her quite sympathetic towards their case.

Colonelhall thank you for the link.

 

[snook1]

Excellent article from Barbie Nadeau:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...ppeal-homeless-mans-contradictory-testimony/#

There has been so much written about Saturday's events, but most of it in such sensationalist style that it was impossible to know what to make of it. So refreshing to read an unbiased account from a reporter who was actually there.

Are you ,actually, implying that the outcome of the saturday's hearing wasn't sensational? Despite the fact that the reports were indeed filled with much drama, there's no denying that at that hearing we heard some unbelieveable stuff and as Nadeau states - the judges and the jurors smiled while Curatolo testifyed. This witness was THE witness and he's pretty much thrown out. It's funny how everyone on the guilt side said that Curatolo's testimony is very important, how very bad for AK and RS and how very good for the prosction and to the whole case, how his testimony was one of the key elements to convict them. Now, the same people are trying to say that it didn't really matter what he said, that there's plenty of other evidence etc. So which one is it?

The reports also contained the news about the leak on the DNA findings, which by every account were quite positive for the defense according to many. They did the math and wrote about Curatolo and the DNA. Both of these stories gave an impression that the appeal is heading towards setting free Amanda and Raffaele. I agree however with the lawyers of AK and RS that it's unthinkable to have these leaked and I'm also worried about their statements. Let's hope they won't bend as the public pressure will be bigger and bigger with each day.

I agree, Nadeau, tries to stay objective, but mostly fails. She got better though. Her book was an absolute disaster and to be fair, she's much better now. Not good, but better.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

does DNA fly

Colonelhall,

Ms. Nadeau wrote, "But, according to Stefanoni and countless forensic experts, 'DNA doesn’t fly,' and as such, contamination is going to be harder to sell to the appellate jury." One of the defense experts said words to the effect that DNA does not have wings but can fly. Does she really believe that contamination and secondary transfer are impossible? Ms. Nadeau is taking these words too literally. Perhaps she could consult with Skeptical Bystander on the subject of "artistic license, symbolism, using fiction to uncover a larger truth, etc."

Ms. Nadeaus' first paragraph puts her and her fellow reporters at the center of the story.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Yes, a common knife. How would it look if, of all people, either Knox or Sollecito went about town buying a large kitchen knife to replace the discarded one. You must remember they were being followed by investigators. It was a long weekend, a very small town, few shops to buy one.

They were stuck with the knife, so they washed and brushed it as best they could and put it back in the drawer with the other twokitchen knives and silverware, also belonging to the rented apartment.

This really does look like reasoning backwards from a conclusion (they did it) to a premise (therefore they must have had a reason to keep the knife).

They must have disposed of the clothes they were wearing at the time of the murder - after all, despite the fact that they police never managed to establish that either of them was missing a single item of clothing or a single shoe, and never managed to find a single spot of blood on any of their clothing, you believe they did it, right? Unless they were nude of course, as some guilters have suggested, but also not touching Meredith in any way that could leave DNA.

Why not dispose of the kitchen knife along with the clothes and the other two murder weapons the Massei theory has them disposing of? They weren't stupid enough to keep those two, why did they keep the third?

The Landlord Fear Theory doesn't hold up - even if they couldn't replace it safely, they could just say it broke and who could prove otherwise?

It sounds like you have Amanda switching between Captain Amanda and Hapless Amanda mid-cleanup, which is pretty weird if you think about it.

 

[bri1]

Excellent article from Barbie Nadeau:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...ppeal-homeless-mans-contradictory-testimony/#

There has been so much written about Saturday's events, but most of it in such sensationalist style that it was impossible to know what to make of it. So refreshing to read an unbiased account from a reporter who was actually there.

Seeing as this is such a high profile case, I wonder how many reporters they can actually fit into the courtroom. Do they have to draw lots? It would be most upsetting for the likes of Candace Dempsey to make the journey and not get in. I do hope that she got a good seat and was not subjected to some of the aggro from Clans Sollecito and Knox. I have always found her quite sympathetic towards their case.

Thanks for the link Colonelhall. But Nadau's incorporation of the childish 'DNA doesn't fly' mantra is not very convincing to say the least. We've all seen those appalling crime scene videos, where the place is a total tip.

 

[Alt+F4]

It does make sense to return it.

The knife was not Sollecito's. It came with with the rented apartment. It was part of the inventory Sollecito signed when he rented the apartment.

So he would rather risk a murder rap than pay the landlord for the cost of a missing knife? I don't think so.

 

[Alt+F4]

Yes, a common knife. How would it look if, of all people, either Knox or Sollecito went about town buying a large kitchen knife to replace the discarded one.

Why would you think the landlord would be doing an inventory soon after the murder? Toss the knife and replace it when the heat died down. I can't say for certain, but it makes sense that RS had the lease on that apartment until the end of the semester (December? January?).

 

[Antony]

Thanks for the link Colonelhall. But Nadau's incorporation of the childish 'DNA doesn't fly' mantra is not very convincing to say the least. We've all seen those appalling crime scene videos, where the place is a total tip.

... also the video showing the investigators "finding" the clasp, passing it from hand to hand, and holding it up to the camera by the metal hook with dirty gloves.

 

[Alt+F4]

They must have disposed of the clothes they were wearing at the time of the murder - after all, despite the fact that they police never managed to establish that either of them was missing a single item of clothing or a single shoe, and never managed to find a single spot of blood on any of their clothing, you believe they did it, right?

The police also never managed to establish that RG was missing a single item of clothing or shoes.

The reason why? Because NO ONE knew the total inventory of the clothing and shoes of any of the three. Yikes, I've been living with the same person for four years and couldn't tell you the total inventory of all her shoes and clothing but you expect two women who lived with AK for all of six weeks to do just that.

As for RS, he lived ALONE, no one could have known his total clothing/shoes inventory.

Sorry, but it's a total fail to believe that none of their clothing or shoes were missing....because you have no idea what they actually had.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

... also the video showing the investigators "finding" the clasp, passing it from hand to hand, and holding it up to the camera by the metal hook with dirty gloves.

That maybe so but unless that You Tube video has been submitted as evidence and actually accepted by Hellmann it has no more bearing on the outcome of this appeal than either of our respective opinions!

 

[Kestrel]

The police also never managed to establish that RG was missing a single item of clothing or shoes.

The police found an empty box for Nike Outbreak 2 shoes in Rudy's apartment. The size and sole pattern of these shoes is an exact match for the shoe prints found in the murder room. Rudy admitted to wearing these shoes on the night of the murder. He also said that while in Germany, his disposed of the shoes and clothes he wore that night