Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
DrDave said:
Why don't we look at the percentage of court cases which turned out to be a mistrial - the claim seemed to be that since some vanishingly small percentage of cases turn out to be a miscarriage of justice that Amanda Knox is therefore innocent.
Click to expand...

The justice system in the US isn't perfect, nor is the system in Italy. Miscarriages of justice do happen.

Look deeper into the Knox case and you will see all sorts of warning signs. The two suspects don't have a rational motive for attacking the victim. Nor do they show the symptoms of the kind of mental illness that causes violent attacks without motive. Neither one had a history of violence. Incriminating statements made by one of the suspects were obtained using coercive interrogation techniques. The prosecution and police fed defamatory and false information to the press to discredit the suspects. The case was declared closed before the forensic evidence was processed. Withholding of key evidence by the prosecution.
 
Kestrel said:
The justice system in the US isn't perfect, nor is the system in Italy. Miscarriages of justice do happen.

Look deeper into the Knox case and you will see all sorts of warning signs. The two suspects don't have a rational motive for attacking the victim. Nor do they show the symptoms of the kind of mental illness that causes violent attacks without motive. Neither one had a history of violence. Incriminating statements made by one of the suspects were obtained using coercive interrogation techniques. The prosecution and police fed defamatory and false information to the press to discredit the suspects. The case was declared closed before the forensic evidence was processed. Withholding of key evidence by the prosecution.
Click to expand...

Off topic.

We're discussing the parents of convicted murderer Amanda Knox, not convicted murderer Amanda Knox herself.
 
zeb said:
And just for Lothian just to make your day.

:D:D:D:D:D:D

Now prove your point, that Amanda was at the place of the time of the murder.

If not, ring home, ET waiting.

I say again Prove your point.
Click to expand...
I can't ring ET. ET was a film. There is no character E.T. It was all done with special effects. E.T. is not real life. Amanda Knox might be innocent in the fantasy world you appear to live in but in this one she is a convicted murderer and her parents are the parents of a convicted murderer.
 
Last edited:
halides1 said:
yeti100,
Would you care to respond to any of the questions that have been put to you?
Click to expand...

hi sorry I missed your question near the top of the page. I was talking about her account that she wrote down, the "gift" statement.
 
Last edited:
just the FAX

spartacus said:
Not trying to pick a fight it just would be good to have a scan of the original rather than a translation and also to know where it came from - but I guess the source doesn't want to be revealed - I also want to know e.g. Are the quotes fro Drew Griffin direct?
Click to expand...
spartacus,

Ms. Dempsey translated a portion of the document: “CD film, photos, search reports on methods of checking evidence into custody, preservation, and transport to the police laboratory.”

The original document reads, “CD filmato, foto, verbale di sequestro, modalita di repertazione, conservazione e trasporto presso il laboratori della Pollzia” I hope this fragment is enough to make my point. I cannot be of help with respect to Drew Griffin.
 
Lothian said:
I can't ring ET. ET was a film. There is no character E.T. It was all done with special effects. E.T. is not real life. Amanda Knox might be innocent in the fantasy world you appear to live in but in this one she is a convicted murderer and her parents are the parents of a convicted murderer.
Click to expand...

The opposition you're painting here is false. Amanda Knox may be completely innocent despite being convicted by the lower court, these two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the proceedings of the ongoing appeal make it more and more conspicuous.

It is also quite possible that she really was smacked a few times in the head by the cops, even Italian commentators admit it. It's a fact that Italian police failed to provide the recording of the interrogation and their accounts of that all night session at the questura are contradictory and confused. They were also caught in many other lies, which they presented as evidence of guilt on various stages of the trial. That makes their position rather weak at least in the eyes of any reasonable person if not in Italian court.
 
source amnesia

yeti101 said:
hi sorry I missed your question near the top of the page. I was talking about her account that she wrote down, the "gift" statement.
Click to expand...
And my answer suggested previously with a citation is that one might be observing memory distrust syndrome, which is a type of source amnesia from what I can gather (psychology is not my field). If Amanda initially believed that she was at Raffaele's but the police kept telling her that they had evidence that she was at her flat and was repressing the memory, it seems to me that at some point she would eventually get confused.
 
Kestrel said:
The justice system in the US isn't perfect, nor is the system in Italy. Miscarriages of justice do happen.

Look deeper into the Knox case and you will see all sorts of warning signs. The two suspects don't have a rational motive for attacking the victim. Nor do they show the symptoms of the kind of mental illness that causes violent attacks without motive. Neither one had a history of violence. Incriminating statements made by one of the suspects were obtained using coercive interrogation techniques. The prosecution and police fed defamatory and false information to the press to discredit the suspects. The case was declared closed before the forensic evidence was processed. Withholding of key evidence by the prosecution.
Click to expand...


This case is really painfully obvious. There is no mystery.
Guede broke into a house and when the victim came back, surprising him, he raped and murdered her, leaving his multiple traces on and in her body and all over the place. Then he fled to another country.
Cops targeted the wrong people before the forensic results came back, all pointing to Guede.

They also slapped a girl around while interrogating her, and then said they forgot to tape it.
 
Katody Matrass said:
This case is really painfully obvious. There is no mystery.
Guede broke into a house and when the victim came back, surprising him, he raped and murdered her, leaving his multiple traces on and in her body and all over the place. Then he fled to another country.
Cops targeted the wrong people before the forensic results came back, all pointing to Guede.

They also slapped a girl around while interrogating her, and then said they forgot to tape it.
Click to expand...
Didn't the Italian Supreme Court rule in Guede's final appeal that he and others were responsible murdering Meredith?
 
Katody Matrass said:
The opposition you're painting here is false. Amanda Knox may be completely innocent despite being convicted by the lower court, these two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the proceedings of the ongoing appeal make it more and more conspicuous.
Click to expand...
Santa Claus may also be real. You seem to think that the extended legal proceedings is an indication of innocence.
 
error rate for false convictions

DrDave said:
Why don't we look at the percentage of court cases which turned out to be a mistrial - the claim seemed to be that since some vanishingly small percentage of cases turn out to be a miscarriage of justice that Amanda Knox is therefore innocent.
Click to expand...
1. Define "vanishingly small." 2. No, that is not anyone's claim, to the best of my knowledge.
 
Last edited:
wheels

Lothian said:
Santa Claus may also be real. You seem to think that the extended legal proceedings is an indication of innocence.
Click to expand...
While watching the wheels come off the prosecution's case in the last few months, I have wondered about the fate of the libel trial. I am beginning to think that it was postponed to await the outcome of the main case.
 
pilot padron said:
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 ??
Click to expand...


I have already ceded to you the point that somebody called Amanda some kind of liar. It's a compromise, in an effort to move the conversation along.

Now the point under discussion should be the rest of your claim, i.e., that somebody called Amanda a liar because she was caught in documented unequivocal lies.
 
halides1 said:
And my answer suggested with a citation is that one might be observing memory distrust syndrome, which is a type of source amnesia from what I can gather (psychology is not my field). If Amanda initially believed that she was at Raffaele's but the police kept telling her that they had evidence that she was at her flat and was repressing the memory, it seems to me that at some point she would eventually get confused.
Click to expand...

i think that's clutching at straws tbh but your entitled to your opinion.
 
Grits, please

DrDave said:
1. Really - you want me to define something that obvious?
2. Then why was it brought up?
Click to expand...

1. The best discussion of the question of the rate of false convictions of which I am aware can be found at the excellent Texas jurisprudence blog gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com. From memory, the blog's host estimated it at 1.5-3%. Each nation's mileage may vary, but 1.5% doesn't qualify as vanishingly small, IMO.

2. You should ask the person who brought it up. I surmise that it was brought up to illustrate that a guilty verdict is not certain proof of actual guilt. You seem to hold a view that is very close to this, based on your comment at 9:42 AM.
 
Last edited:
Katody Matrass said:
This case is really painfully obvious. There is no mystery.
Guede broke into a house and when the victim came back, surprising him, he raped and murdered her, leaving his multiple traces on and in her body and all over the place. Then he fled to another country.
Cops targeted the wrong people before the forensic results came back, all pointing to Guede.

They also slapped a girl around while interrogating her, and then said they forgot to tape it.
Click to expand...

How does this relate to the parents of convicted murderer Amanda Knox?
 
Katody Matrass said:
The opposition you're painting here is false. Amanda Knox may be completely innocent despite being convicted by the lower court, these two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the proceedings of the ongoing appeal make it more and more conspicuous.

It is also quite possible that she really was smacked a few times in the head by the cops, even Italian commentators admit it. It's a fact that Italian police failed to provide the recording of the interrogation and their accounts of that all night session at the questura are contradictory and confused. They were also caught in many other lies, which they presented as evidence of guilt on various stages of the trial. That makes their position rather weak at least in the eyes of any reasonable person if not in Italian court.
Click to expand...

It's also possible that convicted murderer Amanda Knox actually committed the crime for which she was convicted. The CT loonies keep forgetting that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom