Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

Just an opinion (since I claim no supernatural abilities to read the minds of others).

However, IMHO since both the above personages argue here at least daily, they both have read here the answers to the questions they now pose to opponents at least a score of times , even in the very recent past.

Ever so obvious and repetitive queries are characteristically 'argued' here yet again for reasons other than requiring an answer to be yet again provided by acquiescent opposing arguers

I still look to see where the Heres
Theres
and Yonders
lead to. There have been quite a few "new to the thread" posters here as well and some posters don't have the same opinion as before. Like shuttlt, I am also interested in the process of the debate and the effectiveness of an argument.

 

[RoseMontague]

Well it is an obvious point for the lawyers to make in court.

It seems unlikely that this eveidence will have any significant impact.

I agree with Dan O. on this one. If the computer evidence is confirmed, the prosecution would need to prove premeditation.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Oh, just that Amanda signs/says/writes/whatever a bunch of stuff that isn't true. It's not that in a pressured situation she said some stuff that wasn't true, it was the best truth she could remember. Same with Raffaele. I'm not saying that they necessarily can't have gotten confused, I just don't see why people are so keen to avoid the possibility that they may have been aware that what they were saying/writing/signing wasn't true. It's not as if lying when they were scared means they would be guilty.

I guess we simply cannot tell that and it really doesn't matter in the long run. From Amanda's note it's clear she soon realized that what they made her remember was not real. But was she aware during the interrogation that they are lying to her and are playing the old trick of "repressed memory" and "use your imagination"? Certainly looks like she fell for it. That were countless posts here about it and how what she described and what she signed is a textbook coerced false confession. How strongly internalized we can only speculate.

BTW was she even aware what exactly she was signing in Italian during that night?

Same for Raffaele - we can't say how much he believed what he wrote, wanted to believe it or whatever. We even can't tell for 100% he meant Amanda or Meredith. Probably he soon realized he can expect ILE and media to lie about what really have been found. But when he wrote it the concept that DNA results are susceptible to errors, contamination or tampering was apparently foreign to him. I think it's mostly because of the popular culture idea of DNA testing as the extremely strong and conclusive investigation method. In real world it's not so, as we see.

 

[Supernaut]

I once embarrassed my nephew the same way. I thought it was funny; he did not.

Oops. Thanks for flagging my unconscious display of chauvinism - sharp as ever.

 

[Matthew Best]

Just an opinion (since I claim no supernatural abilities to read the minds of others).

However, IMHO since both the above personages argue here on an average, at least daily, they both have read here the answers to the questions they now pose to opponents at least a score of times , even in the very recent past.

Ever so obvious and repetitive queries are characteristically 'argued' here yet again for reasons other than requiring an answer to be yet again provided by unsuspecting, gracious acquiescent opposing arguers

Shuttit is not an "opponent" of mine so I don't know where you're going with this. It seems to be an attempt to personalise the discussion and I know you're opposed to anything like that.

 

[zeb]

Supposedly there is a screensaver log that shows human interaction often enough all night.

Raffaele is a computer geek, and we have all seen the letter that he sent.
the police was looking at the wrong files on his comuter.
He finds it funny, but very sad, after all these are ment to be experts, the way I read his letter, was, give me a new mach, let me conect may old hard drive to the new mach, and I will show you that I never left my flat on the night of the Murder.
So in the end his alibi will stand for him, and also for Amanda.

 

[JREF2010]

the main media piece is the knife might fail.

I think this is reason to celebrate for the defense, but what if the experts come back with some watered down wording that it could be correct originally, but overtime the dna deteriorated balhblahblah....nothingness?

The defense has been dumped on to prove the police and lab are all incompetent or corrupt it seems and this would be reason to be pessimistic.
Hellman probably doesnt want to hear this, and wont have it in his court.

It also seems in this Italian system, the motive and storyline of the crime can be changed everytime they go in front of a Judge, as if the Defense has to fight a different accusation every trial.

fictional examples...
they say Satanic Sex Orgy turned into murder....decided not true by the Judge but....

it was probably Amanda letting Rudy in for a drug deal!!!
again no proof....sooooooooooo...

oh it was about hate and not flushing toilets!!! thats the motive!!

but Massei says naaaahhhhh....but!! it was probably because they did get high and were so high , like a alcoholic driver they killed Meredith in some sex thing Rudy started!!!

and uhm....Amanda smashed the window in Filomenas room because Judge Massei had a vision of it....

but now the Appeal
and the experts might prove the Kitchen Knife is found to be unsupoported!!!
(optimism by the Defense!)

but....maaayyyyybbbbeeeee....sooooo....

this means Amanda might have been in the other room with her ears covered and Raffaele did the murder as Rudy said and uhmmmm....Rudy started it, and they were maybe didnt have times to get high so they took some fast acting powerful LSD murdering drugs....so they are still guilty.

What about the mxed dna, the odd diaries, the lies form the interrogation accusing Patrik! the prosecution will scream!!

and maybe Hellman will say "the scientific evidence doesnt show the two are guilty, but the gut feeling of Edgardo Giobbi is enough for me."

 

[Aber]

I agree with Dan O. on this one. If the computer evidence is confirmed, the prosecution would need to prove premeditation.

Why so?

Given it's a laptop it seems weak evidence that he didn't leave the apartment.

The quote earlier in the thread refered to it being a file related to keyboard light, but not that the keyboard was being used. I'm not sure that it proves anything in particular.

 

[Matthew Best]

Is it your contention that he took his laptop along to the murder?

 

[zeb]

Hellman went for the main vien in this case, no DNA, no case.
end of story.
Thats the way I look on it.

 

[zeb]

Laptop

Why so?

Given it's a laptop it seems weak evidence that he didn't leave the apartment.

The quote earlier in the thread refered to it being a file related to keyboard light, but not that the keyboard was being used. I'm not sure that it proves anything in particular.

What he is saying, the laptop light timeing, will give the right time the computer, was used last.
If the computer was not used for say 5 to 10 mins, the laplap top keyboard, would go out, when the you type your first letter, the keyboard light will come on, and record the time, when the first key is hit.
So that gives you the right time the computer was used.

 

[Alt+F4]

halides1 was referring to Charlie Wilkes but I will answer the question. Unfortunately I have little hope that this injustice will be corrected in Perugia. I do believe this will eventually be corrected by either the Supreme Court or as the result of an agreement reached between governments.

Sorry I confused you with Charlie, but might I ask, why do you think that AK and RS will have a better chance of acquittal by the Italian Supreme Court? Does the Italian Supreme Court function in a similar way as the United States Supreme Court does?

As for "an agreement recached between the governments" what do you mean? Yes, there is a prisoner transfer treaty between the United States and Italy but how would this help gain Amanda's freedom?

At the outset it is important to recognize that a transferred prisoner has no right to appeal, modify, set aside, or otherwise challenge his/her foreign conviction in a United States court or administrative agency after being transferred back to the United States.

and....

In determining an appropriate release date and the length of the supervised release period, the Parole Commission considers many factors, including the nature of the offense, whether the prisoner has accepted responsibility for his actions, and the sentence that would be applied for a comparable federal offense under the United States Sentencing Guidelines.

I don't see Amanda admitting guilt and is she willing to take the risk of serving enough time in a federal prison as a "comparable federal offense" for murder?

http://travel.state.gov/law/legal/treaty/treaty_1989.html

 

[Rolfe]

For Seattle she is normal. Doesn't flush the toilet with pee (mellow yellow, shows environmental consciousness and saves water, pisses off English people), smokes pot provided by boyfriends, doesn't actually drink too much, has a "unique" personality (required), follows her own drummer (required), lives life for the moment, engages in yoga moves spontaneously. Thinks the cops are good guys and you should try to help them out. There is really nothing about this girl that looks strange from the Seattle perspective. People are not the same around the world. She is now a hardened Italian who would RUN from the cops just like any Italian would.

My next-door-neighbour in my previous house was a native of Seattle. Come to think of it, she has a daughter called Amanda who is only a year older than Amanda Knox. I'd dearly love to run that one past her! I have to say, Juanita always seemed perfectly normal to me, as in normal-for-England. Nothing at all "unique" about her personality, in fact quite notably sensible.

I suppose it just goes to show you can't generalise.

Rolfe.

 

[Matthew Best]

I suppose it just goes to show you can't generalise.

This is generally true.

 

[Aber]

What he is saying, the laptop light timeing, will give the right time the computer, was used last.
If the computer was not used for say 5 to 10 mins, the laplap top keyboard, would go out, when the you type your first letter, the keyboard light will come on, and record the time, when the first key is hit.
So that gives you the right time the computer was used.

Except that he didn't seem to be claiming that he was typing on the computer, so its's unclear why it recorded what it did.

 

[Mary_H]

And as pointed out before, you can't lie to a book, it's an inanimate object.

I want to know WHO, which person, or group of people, ie, Humans, not chairs, tables, or books, did RS lie to.

I already knew that he wrote it in his diary, but that doesn't answer the question of WHO he lied to.

Raffaele's diary was addressed to his father and his sister.

It's best to ignore platonov.

 

[Dan O.]

It does look like her profile though. Doubtless it would be possible to get some kind of an idea of the odds if it was important.


It still seems odd to me that it was clean contamination, if you see what I mean.

DNA is quantized. If you reached into a mixed bag of marbles and picked out one, would you expect it to be representative of all the colors of marbles in the bag or would it come out "clean".

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Sorry I confused you with Charlie, but might I ask, why do you think that AK and RS will have a better chance of acquittal by the Italian Supreme Court? Does the Italian Supreme Court function in a similar way as the United States Supreme Court does?

As for "an agreement reached between the governments" what do you mean? Yes, there is a prisoner transfer treaty between the United States and Italy but how would this help gain Amanda's freedom?



and....



I don't see Amanda admitting guilt and is she willing to take the risk of serving enough time in a federal prison as a "comparable federal offense" for murder?

http://travel.state.gov/law/legal/treaty/treaty_1989.html

"why do you think that AK and RS will have a better chance of acquittal by the Italian Supreme Court?"

Because the Italian Supreme Court is not in Perugia, Italy.

"As for "an agreement reached between governments" what do you mean?"

Do you honestly believe that all deals made between governments follow the guidelines that you can cut and paste online? If the independent experts find the DNA evidence to be of no use and the court confirms the convictions anyway, based on "behavior", action will need to be taken by higher powers well outside of Perugia, Italy.

Opinions on this case are shifting fast and furious all around the world. Italy knows this is the case. They don't need the entire world looking down on them for this injustice. Pressure will eventually build to the point that they will take action just to make it go away.

Hopefully Hellmann will do the right thing and release Amanda and Raffaele on appeal. It will take a lot of courage to go against his peers. We will see if he is a courageous man or if he is more concerned with his career. I tend to think he will chose the latter.

 

[sln708]

I do have some strong non-unimpenetrable opinions about the case.

Either that, or I don't have any strong non-unimpenetrable opinions about the case.

I'm not sure.

Ah yes, I see now...no wonder spell check kept rejecting that word. Well anyhow, it made sense if you didn't think about

 

[NewtonTrino]

I'm actually really confused by the whole "Amanda is a goofball" thing. Can someone point out the specific behaviors that make her any different from any other college girl? I'm not seeing it myself but maybe it's because I live in Seattle. Having sex? Normal. Smoking pot? Way normal. Being dumb and naive when talking to the police? Normal. So what did she do that was weird?