Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
In all seriousness, DrDave, if you're unfamiliar with the case and genuinely curious, see here.

If you're just one of these people who enjoy mocking those with a "contrarian" viewpoint, you picked the wrong case.
 
Last edited:
komponisto said:
In all seriousness, DrDave, if you're unfamiliar with the case and genuinely curious, see here.

If you're just one of these people who enjoy mocking those with a "contrarian" viewpoint, you picked the wrong case.
Click to expand...

Googled your site and the 'heading' (for want of a better description) is:

Injustice in Perugia
A site detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito.
Click to expand...

Seems quite biased to me
 
DrDave said:
Googled your site and the 'heading' (for want of a better description) is:
Click to expand...

Er...you could have just clicked on the link and you would have seen the site's heading!



Seems quite biased to me
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you mean. Bias is when a bug in your brain causes you to systematically make errors in a certain direction.

Injustice in Perugia is a site that argues that Knox and Sollecito are innocent. I agree with that conclusion, and recommend that you read the site if you're curious about the what the arguments for innocence are.
 
reality versus confessions

DrDave said:
Well if there was no confession then perhaps more people would be inclined to think there may have been a mistrial.

If she says she did it then, why should I believe her now she says she didn't do it?
Click to expand...
DrDave,

Both your premise and your conclusion are wrong. Amanda's statements say nothing about her taking part in killing Meredith. Moreover, if you don't believe Amanda about Lumumba, why should you believe any aspect of her statement? BTW, there is a take-home lesson for anyone who is questioned by the police: When they ask you to start imagining what happened, it means that you should have stopped the questioning and asked for an attorney an hour ago. Your comment ignores many instances of false confessions (The Central Park Jogger case, Karl Fontenot (The Dreams of Ada; The Innocent Man), and the Norfolk Four (Time magazine; Frontline documentary) come immediately to mind.

Finally, a confession cannot override physical reality in Perugia any more than it could in an arson case in New Jersey*. Meredith was attacked and died much earlier than the prosecution claims. In both instances the prosecutors made fools of themselves by ignoring physics (NJ) or physiology (Perugia). MOO.
*In this case Esposito confessed to starting a fire accidently yet was charged with arson. Also interesting is the fact that the host of this blog argues for recording interrogation.
 
Last edited:
I trust Google for some things also

DrDave said:
I trust Google, not so much random conspiracy sites
Click to expand...
DrDave,

It is the prosecution's idea of Amanda (whose Italian was rudimentary) conspiring with Rudy (whose English was nonexistent) in spite of a complete lack of evidence of communication between them, that qualifies as a conspiracy theory.
 
Last edited:
komponisto said:
<snip>
To me, it is astonishing bordering on incomprehensible that, of all the possible pro-guilt arguments one might put forward, Knox's statements could somehow be considered the strongest. This is one of these things that make me feel like I'm living in a separate world, an isolated subculture of education and rationality. Because to me, it is utterly axiomatic that people's statements and memories are the absolute last place you look for strong, solid evidence that some physical event happened a certain way. Maybe if you're a historian researching some event with little reliable evidence, and you don't have anything else, you can get away with saying "well, this person is usually reliable, and we don't have any particular reason to doubt their account, so we'll accept it". But in a contemporary criminal case, where there are abundant physical traces, why would you ever assign even the slightest credence to an incoherent statement that you were able to browbeat out of a foreign student after hours of interrogation, days after the fact?

Knox's confession, including, indeed perhaps especially including the accusation of Lumumba, isn't even in the top five best pro-guilt arguments. (And it's not like there are any good ones to begin with.) You'd be better off trying to argue that Knox had motive because she hated Kercher for criticizing her bathroom habits. Or citing the damning piece of evidence that tipped off Edgardo Giobbi: the fact that she and Sollecito were seen eating pizza just days after the crime.

There is no actual way in which Knox's statement connects her to the crime. There is no logical inferential path that permits the rational deduction of guilt from the premise of the accusation of Lumumba. It is a purely emotional argument, which runs basically like this:

(1) What happened to Patrick was really crappy.
(2) What happened to Patrick was caused by Amanda.
(3) Therefore, Amanda did a really crappy thing to Patrick.
(4) Therefore, Amanda is a really crappy person.
(5) Murder is something that really crappy people do.
(6) Therefore, Amanda must have committed murder.

If this reasoning were valid, then I would be obliged to believe that Giuliano Mignini must have killed Meredith Kercher, because he has accused not one but two innocent people of the crime, and they remain in jail to this day!
Click to expand...

Outstanding post, komponisto.
 
Is there a possibility that we will get to know earlier what the expert's report on DNA will say or we just have to wait for July 25th?
 
DrDave said:
Before she killed? I think everyone would agree on that
Click to expand...

Tell us, please, how did she kill Meredith Kercher? Did she float around the room and did not touch anything and somehow fatally stabbed poor Meredith? Or maybe she just stood just outside the room and killed Meredith only using her will? Huh?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom