Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

They couldnt tell the police what they were doing while in RS' house. Then RS decided to lie about what he was doing. Its not hard to tell the truth when your innocent. Knox also claims she couldnt remember what she was doing.

For me to believe that i would need a medical diagnosis of some sort of amnesia condition. Along the lines of the character from the movie memento.

The morning of the phone calls is very revealing. Not remebering the phone call to her mom , even her own mother couldnt believe that she couldn't remember it. Neither can I

Ermm.... well, they couldn't give a minute-by-minute breakdown to the police of what they were doing in Sollecito's apartment, because they say they had been smoking weed and generally loafing around. However, over the crucial period when the murder has to have occurred (9pm to 10.30pm), they both maintain that they watched movies and other stuff on the laptop and had dinner. It's true that their memory of around 11pm onwards is apparently vague, but then again they say that they weren't doing anything sufficiently noteworthy to stand out.

By the way, it's not for Knox and Sollecito to prove where they were and what they were doing: it's for the prosecution/court to prove that they were at the cottage committing the murder. That said, according to Sollecito's appeal documents, there is computer evidence showing human interaction with his laptop pretty much all night on the 1st/2nd November.

And I see you've fallen for the "unremembered phone call" scam. There was in fact no unremembered phone call. Prosecutor Commodi tried to put it to Knox that she (Knox) had first phoned her mother at 12pm Italian time (which she translated to "3-4am" Seattle time. This was untrue. Knox's first call to her mother was at 12.47pm Italian time (which was actually 4.47am Seattle time on that day, owing to an overlap in changing back from daylight saving time). This call was remembered by both Knox and her mother, and it was the call where Knox asked her mother what she should do in the light of discovering an apparent break-in, spots of blood in the bathroom, and Meredith uncontactable with her bedroom door locked. Her mother advised her to call the police. Knox called her mother back some 30 minutes later to tell her what had transpired.

 

[Rhea]

Don't mind if I do correct you if you're wrong, Rhea. I stated that I was not aware of anyone who had come into contact with Amanda who had called her a classic pathological liar. That is a true statement. To a certain extent, pilot has corrected me, if we move the goalposts -- I now know that a couple of people did call Amanda some kind of liar.

The phrase "classic pathological liar" implies a psychiatric diagnosis. I don't know of anyone involved in this case who is qualified to make that diagnosis. That's the main reason I doubted that anyone had ever called her that.

Yes, I figured that out now too – I stand corrected there – I should have read the context of your initial assertion (which I didn't, shame on me ), so I did in fact represent your statement and got on a completely wrong track there …

Pilot Padron, I apologize, you were mathematically correct, I was wrong, I still think you could have explained that civilized though …

 

[Matthew Best]

Your apparent levity, inane reference to ET and overuse of smiles demonstrates you are not here to discuss this subject seriously and as Matthew points out are simply trolling.

That's not what I was pointing out, and if you seriously think I was, then that might help explain why you are so wrong about this case: if you are incapable of following a simple conversation such as this, why would anyone imagine you could follow the various ins and outs of a criminal trial?

Of course the other alternative is that you knew that's not what I meant, and are simply "trolling" as lionking has suggested.

 

[yeti101]

Ermm.... well, they couldn't give a minute-by-minute breakdown to the police of what they were doing in Sollecito's apartment, because they say they had been smoking weed and generally loafing around. However, over the crucial period when the murder has to have occurred (9pm to 10.30pm), they both maintain that they watched movies and other stuff on the laptop and had dinner. It's true that their memory of around 11pm onwards is apparently vague, but then again they say that they weren't doing anything sufficiently noteworthy to stand out.

By the way, it's not for Knox and Sollecito to prove where they were and what they were doing: it's for the prosecution/court to prove that they were at the cottage committing the murder. That said, according to Sollecito's appeal documents, there is computer evidence showing human interaction with his laptop pretty much all night on the 1st/2nd November.

And I see you've fallen for the "unremembered phone call" scam. There was in fact no unremembered phone call. Prosecutor Commodi tried to put it to Knox that she (Knox) had first phoned her mother at 12pm Italian time (which she translated to "3-4am" Seattle time. This was untrue. Knox's first call to her mother was at 12.47pm Italian time (which was actually 4.47am Seattle time on that day, owing to an overlap in changing back from daylight saving time). This call was remembered by both Knox and her mother, and it was the call where Knox asked her mother what she should do in the light of discovering an apparent break-in, spots of blood in the bathroom, and Meredith uncontactable with her bedroom door locked. Her mother advised her to call the police. Knox called her mother back some 30 minutes later to tell her what had transpired.

i thought they recorded knox & her mom talking about this phone call and knox saying to her mom she couldnt remember it. Her mom then offered her excuses like stress etc?

be interesting to see the computer evidence but i'm not buying someone cant remember what they were doing.

 

[Matthew Best]

well i've followed the case on & off in my mind theres no doubt this pair were involved.

On and off? Perhaps you switched off at the wrong moments?

 

[DrDave]

<snip>why would anyone imagine you could follow the various ins and outs of a criminal trial?
<snip>

We don't need to - she was found guilty. What else do you need to know?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

memory distrust syndrome

They did give an account of their whereabouts to police ...QUOTE]

They couldnt tell the police what they were doing while in RS' house. Then RS decided to lie about what he was doing. Its not hard to tell the truth when your innocent. Knox also claims she couldnt remember what she was doing.

For me to believe that i would need a medical diagnosis of some sort of amnesia condition. Along the lines of the character from the movie memento.

yeti,

Raffaele discussed the broken pipe in front of Judge Matteini. With respect to the night of November 5th, the subject of memory distrust syndrome was brought up on a companion thread with a citation to the work of Saul Kassin.

 

[pilot padron]

LOL, exactly! Pilot's swift retreat is noted.....

1) If my previously outlined decision not to reply to attempted rebuttals that clearly violated the preface to my statement, as well as a personal decision to limit participation due to other considerations, as well as an effort to help minimize 50,000+ more senseless parsings and nit picking nonsensical nightmares that go nowhere, now becomes to your agenda driven decision process, a need to ridicule,with your inapplicable, inappropriate and borderline insulting appellation "swift retreat"; that is your unadmired and understandably unshared privilege.

2) The original statement I made has been unequivocally repeatedly proven accurate, and even twice reinforced by opposing arguments from a prominent poster and his disciple *spinning* about 'what she meant to say.'

3) As a point of respect for Mary, if she wishes now to begin a tortuous, painstaking parsing of the seemingly significant to her difference between 'pathological' and various other past additional quoted descriptions previously annunciated of Amanda as a liar, to include, but certainly not limited to:
a) a clever liar
b) a cunning liar
c) a calculated liar
e) a compulsive liar
f) a cold blooded liar
d) a talented liar
e) a manipulative liar
d) some kind of liar (Mary's own words)
Please *per chance* may I ask your understanding that I choose for repeatedly stated, and now really redundant reasons not to participate in that frequently embraced here, but nonetheless fruitless futile parsing pursuit.

Again in an attempt to limit additional meaningless excursions and deliberate diversions that add little other than more than to the 50,000+, please do note that *all* the above descriptions of Amanda as a liar were clearly documented in my original post, as well as the score of additional quotes of my post later
Please spare us all requests to repeat those now well examined URLs (zeb).

BTW:
and as another 'my respect for an individual poster' addendum.: RoseMontague just used the appellation: "Anonymous commenter Zorba"

Help me to understand just what qualifies for that certainly not intended/interpreted as complimentary, classification.

If one posts under a deceased's name from history or literature and just omits spacing like say, errrr...BenFranklin, and then subsequently but perfectly understandably resists replying to a query about even actual gender.
Is that somehow less 'anonymous', and the implied less honorable than a poster who borrows the two part historical type name or even *claims* to be using his actual two part surname, but is unverifiable ??

 

[Matthew Best]

We don't need to - she was found guilty. What else do you need to know?

Just this.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

which interrogation do you mean

be interesting to see the computer evidence but i'm not buying someone cant remember what they were doing.

yeti101,

It would help to move the discussion forward if you were more specific, IMO. Both Amanda and Raffaele said that they were at his flat on the night of the murder on every occasion except the night of 5 November. The broken pipe, Amelie, etc. Are you referring to what they said on 5 November, or are you referring to other dates? How much detail do you need? If they got the times at which they did things wrong, is that enough to convince you that they are lying? Do you not accept Raffaele's statement in front of Judge Matteini?

 

[Matthew Best]

Er, what did Pilot just say?

 

[RoseMontague]

1)

BTW:
and as another 'my respect for an individual poster' addendum.: RoseMontague just used the appellation: "Anonymous commenter Zorba"

Help me to understand just what qualifies for that certainly not intended/interpreted as complimentary, classification.

If one posts under a deceased's name from history or literature and just omits spacing like say, errrr...BenFranklin, and then subsequently but perfectly understandably resists replying to a query about even actual gender.
Is that somehow less 'anonymous', and the implied less honorable than a poster who borrows the two part historical type name or even *claims* to be using his actual two part surname, but is unverifiable ??

That was not me Pilot.

 

[DrDave]

Just this.

I don't click on links from supporters of murderers, you will have to summarise for me

 

[Rhea]

The Lies

I would still like to know from the guilt side …


… in the hypothetical scenario that Amanda is innocent: What are her lies? And what are the motivations behind them?


For me that is an important question. There is constant talk about lies, but if I have to presume her guilt for the lies to work as lies, it doesn't count as evidence in my eyes, because it is circular reasoning …

I presume she is guilty, then all these things she said can be seen as lies, and from those lies I conclude that she must be guilty, because an innocent person wouldn't lie (although that's not really true).

So I'd say it doesn't work as evidence against her, since I have to presume guilt to see it as lies and then subsequently conclude guilt from it.

On the other hand, if I look at it through the presumption of innocence / from an innocent perspective, the so called "lies" dissolve into misunderstandings, confusions, coercion.

Or ar there any assertions she made that still work as lies if she is innocent? Because I'm not aware of any …

If we had a video-recording, where we saw Rudy entering and leaving the cottage alone that night – the ultimative evidence of innocence – and everybody would have to accept their innocence, which "lies" would remain?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

anonymous commenters

pilot padron,

I used the phrase "anonymous commenter zorba," just as I have previously used the phrase anonymous commenter stint7 (or something close to it). There is nothing perjorative in using this phraseology to the best of my knowledge; certainly none is intended. I suppose one might (putting on one's Strunk and White, The Elements of Style, "omit needless words" hat) argue that "anonymous commenter" does not add much information, but that is for each commenter, anonymous or not, to decide for himself or herself. BTW, I am unaware of RoseMontague's using the above phrase.
ETA
I use the word "commenter" when others sometimes use "poster." I reserve the use of the word poster for people who add to their blogs. It is a somewhat idiosyncratic distinction, I suppose.

 

[Matthew Best]

I don't click on links from supporters of murderers, you will have to summarise for me

No need as I'm not a supporter of a murderer! You can click safely.

 

[RoseMontague]

pilot padron,

I used the phrase "anonymous commenter zorba," just as I have previously used the phrase anonymous commenter stint7 (or something close to it). There is nothing perjorative in using this phraseology to the best of my knowledge; certainly none is intended. I suppose one might (putting on one's Strunk and White, The Elements of Style, "omit needless words" hat) argue that "anonymous commenter" does not add much information, but that is for each commenter, anonymous or not, to decide for himself or herself. BTW, I am unaware of RoseMontague's using the above phrase.
ETA
I use the word "commenter" when others sometimes use "poster." I reserve the use of the word poster for people who add to their blogs. It is a somewhat idiosyncratic distinction, I suppose.

I have no issues with anonymous comments or the use of pen names. I actually respect the use of this practice. I do think that your use of the term when it is not needed implies meaning by that very use. I sometimes enjoy reading Zorba's comments, other times he gives me a headache.

 

[Lothian]

That's not what I was pointing out, and if you seriously think I was, then that might help explain why you are so wrong about this case: if you are incapable of following a simple conversation such as this, why would anyone imagine you could follow the various ins and outs of a criminal trial?

Let's see who can follow the ins and outs of a criminal trial. Read up and let me know whether that trial found her innocent or guilty.

Of course the other alternative is that you knew that's not what I meant, and are simply "trolling" as lionking has suggested.

One person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. Using lionking's definition

"Troll" = someone who posts inconvenient truths.​

Perhaps the truth is inconvenient for some and they might see me as a troll.

 

[pilot padron]

Sincere Apologies to respected posters Rose and halides1

My inexcusable error.
Sincerely sorry

Just as way of explanation and not excuse, I saw this that you posted earlier and mis-read

Originally Posted by halides1 View Post
RoseMontague,
Anonymous commenter Zorba wrote,

As I type, reading Rose's last post may I strongly agree that sometimes use of an 'anonymous' style name can indeed be detrimental.
The most recent I can think of is that I feel the criticism here of Kermit for not using a real person signature to his lengthy letter on TJMK was very valid.

*Per chance* had Kermit added authenticity to his well chosen words and heartfelt feelings, he may have received more than the 'standard bug letter' insult s/he got as a 'reply'

 

[Rhea]

1) If my previously outlined decision not to reply to attempted rebuttals that clearly violated the preface to my statement, as well as a personal decision to limit participation due to other considerations, as well as an effort to help minimize 50,000+ more senseless parsings and nit picking nonsensical nightmares that go nowhere, now becomes to your agenda driven decision process, a need to ridicule,with your inapplicable, inappropriate and borderline insulting appellation "swift retreat"; that is your unadmired and understandably unshared privilege.

2) The original statement I made has been unequivocally repeatedly proven accurate, and even twice reinforced by opposing arguments from a prominent poster and his disciple *spinning* about 'what she meant to say.'

conflict resolved …