Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[komponisto]

Where was Maresca in 2009 to implicitly suggest a total blackout?

Indeed.

For that matter, I don't recall Mignini complaining about the media coverage either. Instead, I recall him seeking to introduce a Daily Mail story into the court record!

 

[yeti101]

You're absolutely correct. But it's impossible to When Knox and Sollecito are acquitted tomorrow, they will be viewed as innocent of the crime - both legally and morally.

Not morally to the people who still think they're guilty. Unfortunately they will always have this hanging over them.

BTW: Does the tone of your post suggest that you feel Knox/Sollecito will be acquitted tomorrow?

With the defence raising their game in the appeal and the wobbly jurys we seem to have these days an acquittal wouldn't surprise me. But then again a guilty verdict wouldn't surprise me either because I think they were involved.

 

[codyjuneau]

I share the same sentiment. I have a hard time seeing Hellman write the same drivel as Massei, when things played out so differently this time around. Namely the C&V report, but also his intolerance for the prosecution's shenanigans. He had those three pieces of evidence reviewed for a reason (knife, clasp, Curatolo) and they failed miserably. He's not going to just overlook that.

And intelligent judges like Hellman and Zanetti who have previously judged many burglary trials will realize that cat burglar Rudy Guede's signature is all over the break in. And after the break in all the real evidence points directly to Rudy Guede the opportunist raping and murdering Meredith when she arrived home early and surprised him.

Hellmann and Zanetti are nothing like Massei ... fortunately .... in my opinion.

 

[snook1]

Not morally to the people who still think they're guilty. Unfortunately they will always have this hanging over them.

There is a small group that thinks they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That group can be find at .org or .net, also on TJMK. There's nothing else.

 

[Malkmus]

Not morally to the people who still think they're guilty. Unfortunately they will always have this hanging over them.

This is true, and is what makes me fear that if Amanda returns to Seattle that she will be a moving target to some. Especially considering the "recon" that gets done on other people peripherally associated with the Knox's.

 

[yeti101]

There is a small group that thinks they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That group can be find at .org or .net, also on TJMK. There's nothing else.

I can assure you thats not the case. I asked 6 members of my team at work all thought knox was guilty none of them go to those websites. None of them even doubted her guilt. Most described knox as "evil" & "psycho"

You will say those people are uninformed etc but that doesn't change their opinion about knox.

 

[charlatan]

Quite correct, Mr. Rumsfeld!

However, in this case, I think the surprising lack of evidence makes a fairly compelling case that they were not involved in the murder. If I were in a mock trial type setting, I would much rather be given the position in this case that the evidence proves they could not have been involved than I would to be given the side to prove they did it. However, you are right, lack of evidence does not prove anything. Just that we are unable to prove anything.

Oh I agree. And I trust everyone here is painfully aware of the pitfalls of Rumsfeldian logic.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Interesting Tweets:

john_hooper John Hooper
Balance at a (mixed Italian & Brit) dinner of l/term #amandaknox jlists ws 6 'innocentisti', 1 (suspected) 'colpevolista' & 2 uncertain.
10 minutes ago

john_hooper John Hooper
#amandaknox Most journalists who've covered this case l/term think the evidence didn't justify conviction (tho quite a few think qs remain)

Wow, thanks for those, Malkmus! Interesting, indeed...

 

[smkovalinksy]

Do not like what the Italian citizen says on Youtube May follow them tomorrow, though...

International Media have arrived in Perugia, Italy to cover the expected verdict in the trial of Amanda Knox.

The verdict is expected to come on Monday and the streets of the tiny Italian town are already swarming with reporters and producers from every major international TV Network.

Follow our LIVE STORY below with tweets from all the reporters in Perugia and updates during the day on Monday as the verdict is announced.

http://storyful.com/stories/1000008901

Video news report:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASBGBKXgmXo&feature=player_embedded

 

[yeti101]

Most journalists who've covered this case l/term think the evidence didn't justify conviction (tho quite a few think qs remain)

not exactly a ringing endorsement of innocence is it?

 

[Katody Matrass]

I can assure you thats not the case. I asked 6 members of my team at work all thought knox was guilty none of them go to those websites. None of them even doubted her guilt. Most described knox as "evil" & "psycho"

You will say those people are uninformed etc but that doesn't change their opinion about knox.

I think it comes down to her unfortunate looks. With her unusually deeply set eyes it's easy to get an "evil daemon psycho smile" photo, and indeed many such were in circulation. Once she's free and able to give a live interview such opinions will go away.

 

[Ammonitida]

And intelligent judges like Hellman and Zanetti who have previously judged many burglary trials will realize that cat burglar Rudy Guede's signature is all over the break in. And after the break in all the real evidence points directly to Rudy Guede the opportunist raping and murdering Meredith when she arrived home early and surprised him.

Hellmann and Zanetti are nothing like Massei ... fortunately .... in my opinion.

But there's still Migini's contention that Rudy could not have climbed up to that window (which had a window just below it with grating that could act as a small ladder). Let's hope his obvious self-projection on Rudy doesn't sway them.

 

[Malkmus]

not exactly a ringing endorsement of innocence is it?

Or guilt.

But I think their view is shared by many, if not most who examine this case in detail.

 

[komponisto]

It seems like pissing off Massei is only a minor factor with regards to the political issues involved with this case and we just aren't sure about what the normal way of dealing with those in Italy is.

A whole lot of people think that Knox is guilty and that the prosecution is not horribly flawed. Flying in the face of that kind of thing is difficult. Although courts certainly do stand up to prosecutors occasionally, they pick their spots and confronting prosecutors that still remain popular is difficult. In the end everything is political and spending one's political capital is done carefully by every political/legal leader. Whether Hellman chooses to spend some political capital here or not is still an open question.

Even without that, the fact is that a lot of people think RS/AK are guilty. Some of those people could be on this jury. I just read the responses to a link somebody posted above about Lumumba. A lot of those people were hanging their hat on the "confession" and some of them understood that it wasn't a confession exactly but still thought the fact that Knox said she was in the apartment at the time of the murder was very strong evidence against Knox.

As one who thought there was a 99% chance that OJ Simpson would be found guilty in his first trial based on the simplistic notion that overwhelming proof of guilt would get him convicted I am very wary of what can happen here. My mother in law still thinks Simpson was innocent. You only need a few people that think like my mother in law on the jury and AK/RS might be found guilty. Their view of the world is ruled by their gut feel and if Knox's behavior's or situation pisses them off in some way Knox will be found guilty. Facts, no matter how damning of the prosecution's case will be ignored or selectively not understood.

Here is the difference, however: in the Italian system, the judges (both of them; there are two) are part of the jury.

That doesn't mean they will make better decisions, or be immune to the problems you mention (cf. Massei!). But what it does mean is that procedural rulings provide information about which way the court is leaning. This is not the case in the U.S., where the judge is separate from the jury, and what goes on in the jury room is a total mystery until the verdict is announced.

Instead, it's more like appellate cases in the U.S., which you can often predict by the questions the judges ask, and even whether they agree to hear the case or not. In 2000, it was clear in advance how Bush v. Gore was going to come out, because not only did the Supreme Court agree to take the case, they actually ordered a stop to the ongoing recounts, which was a rather extraordinary step.

Here, the analogous extraordinary step is the appointment of Conti and Vecchiotti. So the "who knows what these people are thinking?" element of surprise isn't present in this case. We can read the tea leaves by looking at how the appeal has proceeded. If Hellmann's court thought there was enough evidence to convict without the DNA, they wouldn't have ordered the review. It would have proceeded directly to arguments, the appeal would have been over in January, and the case would probably be in Cassazione by now.

That's the plain truth. If Hellmann and Zanetti saw the case the way the guilters see it, the appeal wouldn't have taken any longer than Guede's.

 

[LondonJohn]

I can assure you thats not the case. I asked 6 members of my team at work all thought knox was guilty none of them go to those websites. None of them even doubted her guilt. Most described knox as "evil" & "psycho"

You will say those people are uninformed etc but that doesn't change their opinion about knox.

This is one of the poorer attempts at a rational argument in recent memory.

As Superhans memorably says in an episode of "Peep Show":

"People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people, Jeremy."

 

[yeti101]

This is one of the poorer attempts at a rational argument in recent memory.

As Superhans memorably says in an episode of "Peep Show":

"People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people, Jeremy."

after the Rumsfeld quote I was waiting for hitler or the nazis. Do we have a win for godwins law or does it have to be hitler?

the argument there wasn't about innoncence or guilt. It was about peoples perceptions of knox.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I can assure you thats not the case. I asked 6 members of my team at work all thought knox was guilty none of them go to those websites. None of them even doubted her guilt. Most described knox as "evil" & "psycho"

You will say those people are uninformed etc but that doesn't change their opinion about knox.

Well, what kind of place do you work at? Those don't sound like well-formed opinions at all, to me.

 

[yeti101]

Well, what kind of place do you work at? Those don't sound like well-formed opinions at all, to me.

informed or not is beside the point. Its an illustration that there's people out there who think she's guilty regardless of the courts decision.

 

[LondonJohn]

not exactly a ringing endorsement of innocence is it?

Consider that the quorum of journalists who've covered this case "long-term" is Pisa, Nadeau and Vogt. Then consider that the journalists who've covered this case long-term might not be the sharpest tools in the box.

And it bears repeating yet again: this trial is not (and cannot be) about finding out whether Knox and/or Sollecito are guilty or innocent (where "innocent" equates to a factual non-involvement in the murder). It's about finding whether there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Knox and Sollecito committed the murder. If there is insufficient evidence to met this burden of proof, then it doesn't matter if one thinks they "might have done it" or whether one thinks "they absolutely certainly didn't do it". Law and morality both demand that one considers Knox and Sollecito innocent if they are acquitted.

And I'll say once again: the Simpson case (where it's fair to say that Simpson very likely carried out the murder despite his acquittal) and the Anthony case (where prosecutors almost certainly overcharged) are both absolute anomalies, and are not comparable to this case in any way. But if people prefer to comfort themselves by rationalising tomorrow's acquittals with the belief that "they did it but got away with it", then that's more indicative of those people's prejudices and poor reasoning skills than any underlying truth.

 

[smkovalinksy]

informed or not is beside the point. Its an illustration that there's people out there who think she's guilty regardless of the courts decision.

I just hope those types are not sitting on the jury...