Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

I do not believe that John Kercher or any of the parents connected to Meredith’s murder had any impact on the first trial, although I acknowledge that some people believe that the appeal can be won or lost in the court of public opinion?

John Kercher had a legal representative present in the courtroom of the first trial, arguing in front of the court according to Mr Kercher's instructions. How on earth could Mr Kercher's views not have had any impact upon the first trial? Or did you think that Maresca was somehow arguing off his own bat, rather than as the representative of Mr Kercher?

 

[Diocletus]

John Kercher had a legal representative present in the courtroom of the first trial, arguing in front of the court according to Mr Kercher's instructions. How on earth could Mr Kercher's views not have had any impact upon the first trial? Or did you think that Maresca was somehow arguing off his own bat, rather than as the representative of Mr Kercher?

Yea. How about the Kercher lawyer storming out of the courtroom during summation? What a clown act and a transparent attempt to prejudice.

 

[LondonJohn]

It had to happen, and it inevitably did!

Kaosium wrote this post a few days ago.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=7429155#post7429155

In it, he clearly used a logical device to point out that, technically speaking, Lumumba could not be excluded from the investigation if the ToD was 11.30pm-plus (since his alibi didn't cover him up to that time). Kaosium was essentially pointing out how ludicrous the police investigation was, and that it was as pretty much as likely that Lumumba was involved as it was that Knox/Sollecito were involved.

In response to this post of Kaosium's, I wrote the following prescient post:

Of course, you're aware that certain commentators on this case (those who have a particular blinkered agenda) will now start to put it about that you're suggesting that Lumumba was involved in Meredith's death

And that premonition has now, depressingly but predictably (and somewhat hilariously) come true. "One could not make it up"........

 

[bucketoftea]

Sounds more to me like he's the lawyer equivalent of a cheap tart. But even cheap tarts can be given a job to do, I guess.

Your misogyny is showing.

 

[bucketoftea]

Save your disgust for those who use emotional blackmail in an attempt to suppress the truth about what really happened to Meredith - including the likes of Peter Quennell, whose "tribute site" (the parodically-named "True Justice") is plastered with pictures of her.

It's John Kercher, not the Knox/Sollecito supporters, who has tried to keep Meredith's personality in the discussion. Regrettably, he has backed a loser by taking the side of the prosecution against 2 of Meredith's friends, instead of asking the real questions about how the investigation into her death was so screwed-up. Sympathy for his family tragedy does not entitle him to put his name to falsehoods against Amanda and Raffaele.

John Kercher has not told lies.

I'm confident my disgust is correctly associated.

Why shouldn't pictures of Meredith be plastered all over the site?

Emotional blackmail? What a larf. How about the whining and crying parents of Amanda on TV frequently (we're broke, Granny's broke, we still have a chance with our daughter [whatever the hell that's supposed to mean], poor Amanda it's hot in the summer)

You know what? It actually is the common, decent custom to allow the bereaved greater latitude and greater tolerance, though in Mr Kercher's case it is clearly not required. Just in case your mom never told you.
You will never win this argument.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

John Kercher had a legal representative present in the courtroom of the first trial, arguing in front of the court according to Mr Kercher's instructions.

I find the above an emotive interpretation of the lawyer client relationship and one that if I may say is an unsubstantiated opinion rather than a fact of any instructions from the client to his legal representative.

How on earth could Mr Kercher's views not have had any impact upon the first trial? Or did you think that Maresca was somehow arguing off his own bat, rather than as the representative of Mr Kercher?

Can you provide any citation any evidence that any of the lay judges or indeed the professional judges was swayed by Mr Kercher?

 

[Rolfe]

Sigh. I don't know why I look.

Fiona didn't know what RT-PCR was (until she googled it and became such an expert she knew better than the court-appointed experts)
One of them doesn't seem to know what a reagent is
Another one just said he doesn't know what "Freudian" means.

Someone apparenly read something I wrote, and you know copy-paste is easy, but whereas I wrote "They are human beings with a lot of human failings, and not even outstandingly intelligent. Or frankly they would be doing something else." this person took the trouble to type, "the police and law enforcement being not too intelligent, otherwise they'd be doing another job", quotation marks and all.

Now I took the trouble to say, "not outstandingly intelligent", which I think is self-explanatory, and a very long way from "not too intelligent". I've noticed this before, that a number of things I've said have been crudely paraphrased by someone keen to mock, but either deliberately distorting to that end, or simply not bright enough to understand the meaning of what I had actually posted.

I'm as sad as they are, reading that pathetic drivel.

Rolfe.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

twisted words

John Kercher has not told lies.

I'm confident my disgust is correctly associated.

Why shouldn't pictures of Meredith be plastered all over the site?

Emotional blackmail? What a larf. How about the whining and crying parents of Amanda on TV frequently (we're broke, Granny's broke, we still have a chance with our daughter [whatever the hell that's supposed to mean], poor Amanda it's hot in the summer)

You know what? It actually is the common, decent custom to allow the bereaved greater latitude and greater tolerance, though in Mr Kercher's case it is clearly not required. Just in case your mom never told you.
You will never win this argument.

bucketoftea,

You are twisting words. A falsehood is an untruth. A lie is a falsehood told by someone who knows that it is false. Did your mother never make this clear to you? You have evaded a discussion of Mr. Maresca that actually involved the specifics of what he did and said. You have evaded the point that Mr. Kercher has said things that were either false or were half-truths (I have previously said that he should be gently corrected for such mistakes). On the other hand there is no excuse for (and no reason to be particularly gentle in pointing out) the falsehoods at websites that claim for years to be devoted to Meredith's memory.

What time do you think that Meredith died, and how did you come to this belief?

 

[RoseMontague]

John Kercher writes an article that says the Knox girl is guilty and lists the evidence for that guilt which evidence includes the testimony of the drug addicted heroin dealing homeless park bench bum (now in jail) and other stuff like manga comics and ritualistic murder. He has opened himself up for criticism and he is just wrong about the evidence, wrong about guilt, and wrong to continue to employ a lawyer that continues to argue guilt in court, in my opinion.

If people want to defend what Mr. Kercher has said about the evidence I will be happy to discuss that. I have no intention of feeling bad about saying Mr Kercher is wrong.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

But if the evidence is so obvious, as you and others claim, why are they sticking to their story? Are they just stupid? Is the conspiracy that strong? Or is the truth not quite as obvious as you portray on this thread?

Well, let's look at the other place you hang out, PMF, where they all profess to believe in guilt and stick to that story.

Are they stupid? No doubt that's a big part of it.

Is the conspiracy strong? Well, some of them have a lot emotionally invested in that community and they'd get kicked out in short order if they defected. Does that count as a conspiracy theory or just groupthink, moderators clinging to their tiny scrap of power and status, lack of proper education and confirmation bias?

Is the truth not as obvious as we make it out? No. It is that obvious. Look elsewhere for explanations.

These people don't have access to internet forums which would put them straight, obviously.

If that were the solution PMF wouldn't exist in its current forms now would it?

If PMF can be that stupid, collectively, why can't the Perugian authorities be that stupid?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

disdain

Your misogyny is showing.

bucketoftea,

When Mr. Maresca asked Andrew Seliber about Amanda's intimate behavior in Seattle that was at the very least sexist, possibly an example of misogyny. When an Italian court listed as one of the reasons why Ms. Knox should be in prison prior to her trial that she is a restless person who does not disdain multiple frequentations, that was certainly sexist and probably an example of misogyny. You defended Mr. Maresca as doing his job well. Please explain how while addressing these examples.

 

[bucketoftea]

bucketoftea,

You are twisting words. A falsehood is an untruth. A lie is a falsehood told by someone who knows that it is false. Did your mother never make this clear to you? You have evaded a discussion of Mr. Maresca that actually involved the specifics of what he did and said. You have evaded the point that Mr. Kercher has said things that were either false or were half-truths (I have previously said that he should be gently corrected for such mistakes). On the other hand there is no excuse for (and no reason to be particularly gentle in pointing out) the falsehoods at websites that claim for years to be devoted to Meredith's memory.

What time do you think that Meredith died, and how did you come to this belief?

I'm not twisting anything.
.
I haven't evaded anything, and Mr Kercher needs none of your advice.
Why should he when not only has he seen all of the evidence, the victim's family is rightly only interested in the truth of what happened. This is the only thing that has any value for them.

This really is a very creepy game you play.

 

[lane99]

lane99,

I don't have a high opinion of them. However, I seem to recall one or more cases in which a suspect was told he had failed a polygraph when he had not. The supposed failure was one of the things that led to a false confession. I don't have a cite handy at the moment, however.
ETA
Peter Reilly may be one example.

Well, the point is that to even talk of "passing" or "failing" seems to be conceding some inherent validity to a test that, in reality, doesn't have any. The criteria for grading polygraph "tests" is essentially arbitrary and without any reliable scientific basis.

(You're original point, I take it, was that he probably "passed" the "test". And this should have tipped the police off that he was probably not guilty. But that's incorrect. Since the test itself is bogus).

At any rate, the link you provided goes to a website that is essential reading for anyone interested in learning more about what a scam polygraph testing ultimately is.

 

[LondonJohn]

I'm not twisting anything.
.
I haven't evaded anything, and Mr Kercher needs none of your advice.
Why should he when not only has he seen all of the evidence, the victim's family is rightly only interested in the truth of what happened. This is the only thing that has any value for them.

This really is a very creepy game you play.

Hmmm, I'm not sure that saying Halides is "playing a very creepy game" is either warranted or civil. But that's for others to decide.....

And are you sure that the victim's family is only interested in the truth of what happened? Are you certain that there are no feelings of vengeance present? Are you certain that financial compensation plays no part whatsoever in their thinking?

By the way, before you overreact, I'm not making the above suggestions because I actively believe that anyone in the Kercher family is necessarily motivated in part by revenge or financial compensation. I make the suggestions because you state a certainty that they are not motivated by these sorts of factors. I want to try to understand how you can justify this certainty.

 

[Rolfe]

Have you per..chance noticed that without references and absurd asinine attempts to ridicule and deride precisely what you deem to be "drivel" a good part of every page here would be blank.

No. The signal-to-noise ratio would be a lot higher, that's all.

Nevertheless, that thread has all the fascination of watching a slow-motion car crash. One knows one shouldn't, but one still does it.

Seeing oneself misquoted is just the icing on the cake.

And anyway, I'm like a cat on a hot tin roof till I hear that someone on Malta has finally answered their bloody phone. PMF provides displacement activity.

Rolfe.

 

[Draca]

John Kercher's articles have been purposefully timed to have the most negative impact on the appeal as possible.


Dec 2, 2010 - Daily Mail
It's utterly despicable that the girl jailed for killing my daughter has become a celebrity
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ate-attack-cult-Foxy-Knoxy.html#ixzz1PjyhLpn4

This first article of John Kercher's is right between the Nov 24 Appeal start date and Dec 11 date where Amanda gave an emotional statement to the court. Francesco Maresco walked out while Amanda was speaking.


Dec 18, 2010 - Mirror
We will never forget our murdered daughter Meredith Kercher, by her dad John
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...y-her-dad-john-115875-22790628/#ixzz1PkFQ3kM4

The second article was released on the Dec 18 court date where the court granted an Independent DNA Review.


Mar 13, 2011 - Sunday Times
Rescuing Meredith from the ‘Foxy Knoxy’ frenzy
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...irl_meredith_was_funny_clever_and_extremely_/

The third article corresponds with the Mar 12 court date with the Disco owners.


May 21, 2011 - The Sun
My View
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...s-evidence-that-may-undermine-conviction.html

In the Fourth, May 21 was the original date the DNA Report was suppose to be reviewed. John Kercher was given rebuttal space for Bob Graham's article favoring innocence.

 

[RoseMontague]

.... even an Italian correctly called 'Doctor' without a PhD

The Italians can call her Doc if they want to. Is she qualified to be running that lab is my question. I think she is in the position she is in because she delivers certain results.

 

[LondonJohn]

I find the above an emotive interpretation of the lawyer client relationship and one that if I may say is an unsubstantiated opinion rather than a fact of any instructions from the client to his legal representative.

Why do you suggest that it's an "emotive" interpretation? A lawyer is paid (either by his/her client, or by a third party such as the state) to represent the position of that client. In order to do this, the lawyer will have a number of meetings with his/her client, in order to discuss the position that the client wants the lawyer to take. It is unethical and improper for a lawyer to make arguments in a courtroom that (s)he does not reasonably assume reflect the opinions and wishes of his/her client. Mr Maresca's arguments in Massei's court necessarily reflected the opinions, wishes and position of his client, John Kercher (and other members of the Kercher family). I don't see what's so hard to understand about this, frankly.

Can you provide any citation any evidence that any of the lay judges or indeed the professional judges was swayed by Mr Kercher?

I am suggesting they were swayed somewhat by Mr Maresca, who was acting on the instructions of Mr Kercher.

 

[Antony]

John Kercher has not told lies.

What about these then (from the Sunday Times article quoted on TJMK):

• "Sollecito claimed to have been working at his computer on the evening of the murder, but computer records show that it was inactive"
• "A witness saw the couple several times in the vicinity of the cottage on the night of the killing,"
• "Their alibis changed nine times,"
• "Sollecito’s naked footprint was found on a bathmat in the cottage."

Needless to say, these are all demonstrably false. Now, whether or not these were "lies" depends on whether JK believed them to be true; my view is that JK is repeating them because his advisers have lied to him in turn. He has been utterly let down by the Perugia authorities, and then allowed them to trick him into supporting their attempts to save face by hanging onto an unsupportable criminal prosecution.

I'm confident my disgust is correctly associated.

Why shouldn't pictures of Meredith be plastered all over the site?

Why do you need to ask this question? Meredith died tragically in horrible circumstances. She was not a public figure, and deserved to be accorded the decency of being treated with some privacy. You have to question the motives of someone like Peter Quennell, in a different country, who had no connection with her, setting up a site in her "memory", and making use of pictures which were at the time they were taken, intended to be private.

Emotional blackmail? What a larf.

That's what I call these attempts to prevent discussion of the facts of this case, by appealing to unspecified moral privileges to be accorded to those presenting one side of the argument.

How about the whining and crying parents of Amanda on TV frequently (we're broke, Granny's broke, we still have a chance with our daughter [whatever the hell that's supposed to mean], poor Amanda it's hot in the summer)

Now we see the real personal attacks being made on the other victims of this tragedy. Unlike John Kercher, Amanda's family do not have a choice - unless you think that abandoning their daughter to a foreign jail for half her life is a choice. It doesn't take much imagination to understand the desperate situation they are in, through no action of their own.

You know what? It actually is the common, decent custom to allow the bereaved greater latitude and greater tolerance, though in Mr Kercher's case it is clearly not required. Just in case your mom never told you.
You will never win this argument.

Nobody is attacking John Kercher. He has made a choice to take part in the public discussions, by allowing his name to be put to these articles. I have every sympathy with him in his bereavement, and the fact that he has been cruelly deceived and used by his "advisers" - but that does not extend to him allowing his name to be put to articles aimed at poisoning the current judicial process.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Ebb Tide

I'm not twisting anything.
.
I haven't evaded anything, and Mr Kercher needs none of your advice.
Why should he when not only has he seen all of the evidence, the victim's family is rightly only interested in the truth of what happened. This is the only thing that has any value for them.

This really is a very creepy game you play.

bucketoftea,

You twisted Antony's word "falsehoods" into "lie" in the message to which I responded. You twisted my comments into my giving advice to Mr. Kercher. You are still dodging and weaving rather than defending the specifics of Mr. Maresca's actions, the ones I previously pointed out and his walking out of Amanda's statement at the beginning of the appeal in a dramatic fashion. One hopes that the start of the appeal marks the turning of the tide in the ebb and flow of this case.

I'd like you to stop throwing around words like "creepy" and start engaging in civil and meaningful debate. Are you interested in finding out as much as you can about what happened that night? If so, doesn't that mean testing the putative semen stain and opening up the knife. If not, why not? What time did Meredith Kercher die? If she died when Sollecito and Knox were provably at his flat, then all the feigned righteousness in the world doesn't make them guilty, bro.