Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[JREF2010]

How did they clean up knox's bloody foot prints in the corridor without cleaning up Guede's bloody shoe prints?

What did they clean in the bathroom?

What did they clean in the kitchen?

How did they stage the break in?

I wonder if there is any evidence of towel fibers found in the wounds.

This Rudy tale of him using two towels that become saturated with blood, was either from him wiping things up or as he said applying to the wounds.

 

[Kaosium]

Here's a translation of a French article about the effect the Amanda Knox case has had on Perugia. According to this, which is all subjective, there's been a negative effect on the economy, notably in the number of tourists and American and English students attending the Foreign school. The Perugians are annoyed and think they've been unjustly punished, however I wonder just how many people quoted in this piece were up at midnight to applaud the verdict?

Thus while tourism for Italy may not be down if one takes economic factors into consideration, this is an indication that perhaps people are choosing other destinations than Perugia. I cannot say I'd be all that enthused about going to Perugia, however I wouldn't hold that against Florence, Milan, Turin or Rome. I would learn a few words of Italian first, an absolute necessity in my mind when dealing with the police in Italy:

'Stai mentendo, voglio un avvocato!'

(Being as I can still kinda read French I'd like to say I translated this for you all, but that would be really stupid and a complete waste of time as google translate does just fine with French. All I did was the finishing touches)

For four years now, the city of Perugia has been the scene of the trial of American Amanda Knox, who was sentenced to 26 years by the Italian courts for the murder of her roommate. With its many twists and turns, the "Amanda Knox case" has received exposure for four years by the British and American press, to the dismay of the inhabitants of Perugia who have seen the number of tourists and English-speaking students drop since 2007.

"I do not know if Amanda Knox is guilty, but she deserves prison for scaring away all the English and American tourists in Perugia." C. Vittoria, who sells postcards on the central square of the medieval Italian city. Since the Amanda Knox case - a young American student studying in Perugia, sentenced to 26 years for the murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher UK and whose trial resumed on appeal, Vittoria has seen attendance at his shop for tourists English halved.

Like Vittoria, "Amanda Knox case was a disaster" for Giovanni, who owns an ice cream shop in the tourist center of Perugia. "I pay everyday the consequences of this trial, and even more since he took over last year," he said. "It's been four years that we are victims of propaganda, a true British and American press against Perugia. They describe our city as a hub for drugs and our police as corrupt to the core." It has been a poor travel brochure "Alessandro ironically, sometimes refuses to sell the Daily Mail, Newsweek magazines" when they say too many lies. "
"I was told it was a cursed city"

On vacation in Italy, Hannah, a young Englishwoman, 22, is one of the tourists who almost never came to Perugia because of Amanda Knox case. "I hesitated a lot before coming. When I told my friends that I was to visit in Perugia, they tried very hard to dissuade me to the point that I almost canceled my train tickets at the last minute! ", says the girl who is "careful not to go into the dark streets" of the medieval old town. "I was told it was a cursed city, but I try not to fall into psychosis," she adds.

The Amanda Knox case has not only scared away tourists from Perugia but also the English-speaking students. Student life, once bustling, is a little less today. "Many things have changed because of Amanda Knox. We don't go out late at night unless the police are more present, avoid the bars that serve beer in glasses and prefer plastic cups ..." says Zarko sadly, a former Serbian International University student, which included Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher at the time of the crime. "Now on campus, you can not find any Americans or British. There are more North Africans, some French and Spanish." Sitting on the steps of the famous cathedral of San Lorenzo, Zarko makes a gesture that shows the square, half empty. "The American and British press punished Perugia for a crime she did not commit. Funny revenge."

 

[Antony]

Mainly because most of the guilters were waiting for the DNA results to confirm stefanoni's results. Whats going to happen if the knife and clasp get tossed? Will the prosecution then agree with the defense and ask the court to test the possible semen stain? After all they would need new evidence against Sollecito/Knox.

Maybe they can go back to the cottage and Raff's flat and just "find" an item from each location (which the current occupiers have conveniently kept for some unexplained reason), with incriminating DNA on it, and get it accepted by the court - with a supportive press announcement of course.

Oh - I forgot - Massei isn't the judge for the appeal, is he?

I've been reading the response here to the news of the Conti/Vecchiotti report with mild surprise, in that the results of the report shouldn't have been a shock to anyone. Both items of "evidence" resulted from obvious conjuring tricks pulled off by the investigators, in that they visited the 2 locations, retrieved a single object from each, and obtained "evidence" from them which met the needs of the prosecution. What a shame they can't do something similar now.

Their antics in the bra-clasp video in particular suggest that they knew the results of the "testing" at the time the item was "found".

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>So I guess what I'm trying to say is, if only one side is presented here, and the only reason the innocenti case looks good is because the much better case for guilt isn't getting an airing, why doesn't someone just present it?<snip>

Rolfe.

Lord knows they've tried, Rolfe, but we haven't let them. We practice sophistry and we're impolite. They are powerless against our poor manners.

Rolfe, did you join at PMF?<snip>

Yes, by all means, join, Rolfe. Just don't speak.

 

[Mary_H]

I don't believe I know anyone who hasn't lied about something. I don't believe they killed anybody however. Personally, I think the more pressure you undergo the greater the chance is that you will lie. Were the cops under some pressure as well?

Amanda thought they were: "I understand that the police are under a lot of stress, so I understand the treatment I received."

 

[Mary_H]

"I too want to find out who killed her."

You dim bird, we all KNOW who killed her. It's daffy remarks like this that some people take the wrong way.

Rolfe.

You know, I had the same thought.

Unfortunately, although Amanda is a serious and intelligent young woman, she does not have any understanding of the psychology of those who suspect her. This was her problem from day one. It never crossed her mind that people would deduce guilt from the kind of things they do.

In her mind, I think she's avoiding "being judgemental" or "confrontational" by directly accusing Rudy. (If this quote is actually accurate -- remember it's second hand, and then through a translation.) What she means to say is "I, more than anyone, want justice for Meredith and her family."

We have been told in the blogs by people who are familiar with the culture that to accuse someone else of committing a crime you are accused of is not looked upon favorably in Italy. It's possible her lawyers have advised her to express that stance.

On the other hand, I don't think you can overestimate the effect of her high school education on Amanda's thinking. After four years of daily classes in the New Testament and Liberation Theology, she definitely is avoiding being judgmental. A "serious and intelligent young woman" is the most likely student to take those types of lessons to heart.

I agree that "she does not have any understanding of the psychology of those who suspect her." The majority of us here are baffled by it as well.

 

[Mary_H]

Agree, it is said that diagnosing from the distance is something no real psychologist would dare (and so is the one in he article disclaiming - "Everything I read would be consistent with it and it could be one alternative theory for the behavior that made her seem suspicious," says Gaus, while stressing that she has not met Knox and cannot diagnose her. )

There's also a sober look at the legal culture that condemned her:
Of course, whether or not a formal diagnosis of Asperger's would help or hurt Knox's case is hard to say: the stigma associated with autism spectrum disorders might make her seem more suspicious, rather than less, in the eyes of some legal authorities.

just interesting speculations, nothing more

The most dangerous aspect of this article is that it suggests that the police might have had a valid reason to suspect Amanda. They did not.

 

[Kaosium]

The most dangerous aspect of this article is that it suggests that the police might have had a valid reason to suspect Amanda. They did not.

Personally I do think they had what appeared to be valid reasons to suspect Amanda, or more exactly suspect she was complicit with Patrick in the murder. It was just all mistakes, (some on Amanda's part) coincidence and ultimately confirmation bias. I betcha at one point they really thought the figure in that video was Amanda.

However by the time they were done they had to realize it was all garbage, so all they had left was that she was acting differently so they had to blow that way out of proportion to disguise the fact they'd arrested her, Patrick and Raffaele mistakenly. That's why they made such a big deal about her 'confession,' her 'changing her story' and her behavior--it turned out they didn't have any legitimate other reasons to have suspected her and put the screws to her like that.

However I also think Giobbi really is that clueless.

 

[Mary_H]

I think we're allowed to talk about someone who is a "guest", at least until she re-registers.

I'm disappointed in Fiona, I have to say. I've been active in a LOT of threads with her over the years, and I've always had the highest regard for her thought processes and arguments. Her espousal of the guilter cause was a HUGE factor in my impression that there were two sides to this story, and a reasonable case to be made for guilt.

I haven't read any of Fiona's posts on the Kercher case, only the occasional post elsewhere indicating on what side of the argument she stood. I don't know how she explained the time of death evidence, which to me was the most difficult thing for the guilt side to get round. I wonder now, if I'd advanced the point of view back then that I've advanced in recent weeks, she'd have reconsidered. We were virtually always arguing on the same side in the Science and Medicine threads, and I still find it hard to understand how she could have got it quite so wrong.

I also find it hard to understand why she left JREF to participate in a one-issue forum, because for me one of the great things about this forum is the variety of topics one can discuss if one has a mind to do so. I'm not even a particular devotee of this case, but hey, it's a distraction.

This isn't the Fiona I knew for years and I don't really understand it.

Rolfe.

I have a few speculations about this puzzle.

1.) When it came to this case, Fiona was biased, as I illustrated in this post. Her bias might have been attributable, at least in part, to the fact that she "fell in with the wrong crowd." She joined PMF on the 11th of December, 2009, which was a week after the OP of the cartwheels thread. Her first comment on PMF included this statement: "I have only been following this seriously for a few days and I have found this site awesome for the wealth of information and the tone as well."

Perhaps they took her under their wing and she became attached to them. The PMF members who have been in the inner circle have struggled painfully with expressing their disagreements, and it is usually very hard on them when they are banned, as everyone who openly disagrees there eventually is.

2.) Fiona had emotional difficulty dealing with certain personalities. She expressed her contempt for me a number of times (which also may be attributable to the onslaught of negative PR I received on PMF when I first started on JREF).

Believe it or not, the argument that finally sent her packing was one with halides1. Is there anyone here who is more rational or more even-handed than halides1? A person has to really want to tangle, to get into it with halides1, and then go to another website and complain about how rude and irrational the JREF posters are.

3.) Fiona was not used to being wrong. I could be completely off base about this, but isn't there a number of discussions on JREF that involve the expression of opinions that aren't necessarily based on fact? I mean, the facts of Sasquatches or psychic phenomena may never be known in our lifetimes, so people must use reason and logic exclusively to reach conclusions about their existence.

In this case, however, facts can be known and facts are known. This is something a lot of the guilters, e.g., Fulcanelli, had trouble acknowledging. Fiona may be good at reason and logic, but in this case, they do not suffice.

 

[LondonJohn]

So.... I was out of action yesterday - owing to a kind invitation to the men's semis at Wimbledon Kevinfay would have been soooo impressed (even though Murray crumbled even faster than the case against Knox and Sollecito....)

I see that the latest diversionary tactic being employed by the other side is to do with the Strauss-Kahn case (one board appears to have almost fully morphed into a discussion on DSK - I'm sure Meredith would have been so proud!). The idiot "logic" is that since the alleged victim's credibility is coming into question in that case, and that since this may have a material effect on the ability to secure a conviction against the alleged perpetrator (DSK), this is somehow relevant to the Knox/Sollecito case. The idiot "logic" concludes that if Knox's (and presumably also Sollecito's) credibility is also being called into question, this can almost be enough to convict them in and of itself.

Of course, this is sheer idiotic thinking (with a decent dose of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance thrown in for good measure). The idiots still don't seem to understand the asymmetry of proof involved in a criminal trial. The prosecution has to convince the jury (or judicial panel) beyond all reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused. the defence only has to show reasonable doubt (it can show total innocence it it is able to, but only reasonable doubt is necessary for an acquittal). Therefore, in a case like DSK's, if the alleged victim - and the only witness - has major credibility issues in other areas of her life, this can by itself provide reasonable doubt as to her credibility and veracity on the rape allegation.

But it doesn't work in the same way if the credibility of the defendant is called into question. Sure, it can be damaging to the defendant, but it usually can't make or break the case in the same way as credibility issues with the alleged victim can do. And incidentally, in the DSK case, the defendant has credibility issues of his own (allegedly, he initially said there had been no physical contact whatsoever between him and the alleged victim; but, when confronted with forensic evidence, he allegedly changed his story and claimed consensual sexual activity. Hmmmmmm...).

In the case of Knox and Sollecito, therefore, any credibility issues regarding them are of some significance, but are not of major probative value. The court has to be convinced beyond all doubt(doubt that a reasonable person could reasonably hold) that they participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher. The only way in which credibility issues could fatally damage a defendant is if they are caught engaging in behaviour that is completely incompatible with a position of innocence (e.g. Scott Peterson carrying on his affair while others were frantically searching for his missing wife, or a defendant being caught in a provable lie directly related to the offence they are charged with). And even then, this is usually not enough. Hard physical evidence is usually required to convince a court beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt.

(As a side issue, this is one reason why there is an abnormally high rate of acquittal in rape cases. In most such cases, there are only two witnesses to the alleged crime - the accused and the victim. If such a case reaches trial, then by definition the alleged victim is saying a rape occurred, and the defendant is saying a rape didn't occur. The defendant may say that no sexual activity occurred whatsoever, or he can say that there was sexual activity, but it was consensual (this latter defence is most commonly employed if there is forensic evidence of sexual activity). In such a circumstance, it's often incredibly difficult for a court to judge that it's convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is lying and the victim is telling the truth. And if that's the case, an acquittal is the correct verdict - even if it's allowing a rapist to "get away with it". It's an incredibly difficult issue, and one which has occupied the minds of law enforcement officials, legislators, jurists and jurisprudence scholars for decades now.)

 

[LondonJohn]

I have a few speculations about this puzzle.

1.) When it came to this case, Fiona was biased, as I illustrated in this post. Her bias might have been attributable, at least in part, to the fact that she "fell in with the wrong crowd." She joined PMF on the 11th of December, 2009, which was a week after the OP of the cartwheels thread. Her first comment on PMF included this statement: "I have only been following this seriously for a few days and I have found this site awesome for the wealth of information and the tone as well."

Perhaps they took her under their wing and she became attached to them. The PMF members who have been in the inner circle have struggled painfully with expressing their disagreements, and it is usually very hard on them when they are banned, as everyone who openly disagrees there eventually is.

2.) Fiona had emotional difficulty dealing with certain personalities. She expressed her contempt for me a number of times (which also may be attributable to the onslaught of negative PR I received on PMF when I first started on JREF).

Believe it or not, the argument that finally sent her packing was one with halides1. Is there anyone here who is more rational or more even-handed than halides1? A person has to really want to tangle, to get into it with halides1, and then go to another website and complain about how rude and irrational the JREF posters are.

3.) Fiona was not used to being wrong. I could be completely off base about this, but isn't there a number of discussions on JREF that involve the expression of opinions that aren't necessarily based on fact? I mean, the facts of Sasquatches or psychic phenomena may never be known in our lifetimes, so people must use reason and logic exclusively to reach conclusions about their existence.

In this case, however, facts can be known and facts are known. This is something a lot of the guilters, e.g., Fulcanelli, had trouble acknowledging. Fiona may be good at reason and logic, but in this case, they do not suffice.

It's not exactly challenging or provocative to argue against bigfoot, flat earth, 911 conspiracies or homeopathy. This case, however, requires one to swim against the stream somewhat (as others have pointed out, in most instances the rational view is the one held by the "authority" side of the argument - think of 911, moon landings, JFK, etc as examples). It also requires a good amount of independent research and structured, logical thinking. I think that some people are good at that sort of thing. And others are not.

 

[LondonJohn]

Personally I do think they had what appeared to be valid reasons to suspect Amanda, or more exactly suspect she was complicit with Patrick in the murder. It was just all mistakes, (some on Amanda's part) coincidence and ultimately confirmation bias. I betcha at one point they really thought the figure in that video was Amanda.

However by the time they were done, they had to realize it was all garbage, so all they had left was that she was acting differently so they had to blow that way out of proportion to disguise the fact they'd arrested her, Patrick and Raffaele mistakenly. That's why they made such a big deal about her 'confession,' her 'changing her story' and her behavior--it turned out they didn't have any legitimate other reasons to have suspected her and put the screws to her like that.

However I also think Giobbi really is that clueless.

I totally agree with you. I think that the police and prosecutors were convinced (or, more accurately, had convinced themselves) that Knox and Sollecito were deeply involved. I think that had reached that conclusion by the afternoon of November 5th, and that the interrogations of the night of 5th/6th were designed to confirm their belief.

And, like you, I also think that the police did have some reasonable reasons to come to this conclusion. But I think they took these reasonable reasons, and quickly amplified them (with the help of tunnel vision and confirmation bias) into what they thought was a pretty cast-iron case. And from then on, there was no going back for them.

 

[LondonJohn]

More information being withheld from the experts! I'm shocked


I looked closely at that section of the Massei Report and the one connection that should have linked the network time with the phone's time was the last connection at 22.13.29. However, for this connection we get only

The Wind [phone record] printouts register that (but the data is absent in the mobile
phone’s memory)
4. at 22.13.29 hours a GPRS connection (to the Internet) lasting 9 seconds​

So from the records at hand, we haven't got any indication that the phones internal clock is anywhere close to accurate. These could be calls from months ago before Meredith came to Italy. Or, since this phone would be Meredith's primary timepiece, she would have just reset the time a few days earlier with the Daylight Savings Time change.

The readout of the phones memory was copied to the court record so it should be available to resolve this issue.

On European GSM networks, there usually is a facility for the network to set the handset time/date automatically. But the default on the handset is always for the user to set this information manually. I very much doubt whether Meredith would have taken the trouble to go through all the menu options to change the time/date settings to automatic network synchronisation. It's almost certain (in my opinion) that her time and date were set manually by her.

And, with that in mind, the police should have easily been able to correlate her phone time with actual time - either by looking through her last dialled or received calls (calls which had actually connected) and matching them with the network information, or via the even easier method of looking at the current time displayed on the handset and then looking at an accurate clock on the wall. One would hope that they employed one of these two methods (the first being the most definitive), but given previous form of the "crack" postal police, one can't be too sure...

 

[Justinian2]

http://www.lejdd.fr/International/E...faste-pour-le-tourisme-351155/?from=headlines

Bing Translation:

"This is four years that we are victims a real propaganda of the British and American press against Perugia." They describe our city as a hub of the drug and our police as corrupt to the bone marrow. "We have seen better as leaflet tourism", said Alessandro, kiosquier who sometimes refuses to sell the Daily Mail and Newsweek "when they say too many lies".

Sitting on the steps of the famous Cathedral of San Lorenzo, Zarko shows with a gesture the square it overlooks, half-empty. "The American and British press have punished Perugia for a crime she did not commit." "Funny of revenge."

They still don't get it! According to this, many Perugians think that it is the American press propaganda, lies and revenge that is the cause of the decline in American and British students to that city!

They are still spouting anti-Americanism bias! Incredible!

[According to the source there is instantly an assumption (or one that needs no reason given) that Amanda Knox is guilty and therefore the American press has to be lying or issuing propaganda or, even worse, that Amanda is guilty and that the vile American press is 'punishing' the city of Perugia']

 

[Antony]

Now that the DNA "evidence" on the knife and bra-clasp have been shown to be fictitious, what does that say about "conspiracy theory" theories? There seems to have been a real sea-change in the discussion since the Conti/Vecchiotti report, and one notable theme now missing is LK's oft-repeated claim that "in order for the pair to be innocent, there would have to be a vast conspiracy of police and judges to hide the truth".

Well, there is no "vast" conspiracy, but something resembling a small one. It's now beyond doubt that Stefanoni misrepresented her results and attempted to conceal the data, and that cannot have happened without the knowledge of others in her department, nor did it without the cooperation of judge Massei.

One of the frustrating things about any discussion of this kind is the way that some will cry "Conspiracy Theory!" at any suggestion that we are not being told the whole truth by officialdom. Of course, unfounded CT's exist (the accusation of a publicity campaign orchestrated and paid-for by FOAK, is one) - but then so do government cover-ups. Examples are of course the innumerable miscarriages of justice where there has been official resistance to any reexamination, but also for example the bogus claims about the overwhelming Soviet military threat from 1950 to 1989, the Iraq WMD deception, and the continuing "war on drugs" - who believes that we are being told the whole truth about the "drug threat"?

 

[platonov]

We have been told in the blogs by people who are familiar with the culture that to accuse someone else of committing a crime you are accused of is not looked upon favorably in Italy. It's possible her lawyers have advised her to express that stance.

On the other hand, I don't think you can overestimate the effect of her high school education on Amanda's thinking. After four years of daily classes in the New Testament and Liberation Theology, she definitely is avoiding being judgmental. A "serious and intelligent young woman" is the most likely student to take those types of lessons to heart.

I agree that "she does not have any understanding of the psychology of those who suspect her." The majority of us here are baffled by it as well.

This 'New Testament' you refer to is certainly contradictory and confusing I think we can all agree (probably best kept away from children and the weak minded)

How else to explain why AK, despite being exposed to it for 4 years, did accuse an innocent man PL and yet now 3 years later refuses to accuse someone (RG) that everyone accepts is guilty.

I have never had any time for any 'philosophy' that involves reliance on [an interpretation of] the 'magic books' and this episode would appear of be yet another example of the dangers inherent in that approach.

 

[Dan O.]

On European GSM networks, there usually is a facility for the network to set the handset time/date automatically. But the default on the handset is always for the user to set this information manually. I very much doubt whether Meredith would have taken the trouble to go through all the menu options to change the time/date settings to automatic network synchronisation. It's almost certain (in my opinion) that her time and date were set manually by her.

And, with that in mind, the police should have easily been able to correlate her phone time with actual time - either by looking through her last dialled or received calls (calls which had actually connected) and matching them with the network information, or via the even easier method of looking at the current time displayed on the handset and then looking at an accurate clock on the wall. One would hope that they employed one of these two methods (the first being the most definitive), but given previous form of the "crack" postal police, one can't be too sure...

As someone recently said, you have to reset the time if you change the battery. The first thing the postal police did when they got the phones in their possession was to pull the SIMM to try and read it. This is often under the battery forcing the phone to be shut down first.

 

[Mary_H]

This 'New Testament' you refer to is certainly contradictory and confusing I think we can all agree.(probably best kept away from children and the weak minded)

How else to explain why AK, despite being exposed to it for 4 years, did accuse an innocent man PL and yet now 3 years later refuses to accuse someone (RG) that everyone accepts is guilty.

Yes. How else.

I have never had any time for any 'philosophy' that involves reliance on [an interpretation of] the 'magic books' and this episode would appear of be yet another example of the dangers inherent in that approach.

Absolutely. The Bible made her do it.

 

[platonov]

Isn't theology fun

Yes. How else.



Absolutely. The Bible made her do it.

Well I obviously don't believe that , you brought it up, but its no dumber than most of the arguments put forward on this thread to explain the accusation of PL - one of which I see Kaosium, Kevin Lowe & LJ are again propounding on this very page.

 

[Mary_H]

Well I obviously don't believe that , you brought it up, but its no dumber than most of the arguments put forward on this thread to explain the accusation of PL - one of which I see Kaosium, Kevin Lowe & LJ are again propounding on this very page.

Thank you. What a relief.