Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ammonitida said:
You mean there's another news source that confirms the CBS article?
Click to expand...

I dont know, ...it could be like a copycat of a copycat of a copycat...you know how the media is all interconnected. I dont know which specific inc. it was.

It wont matter in a few minutes. The real verdict will put this all to rest.


6:52 Perugia time...

A disturbing comment buy a Italian Lawyer was on a talk show this morning, and mentioned the Italian courts can often convict from media induced slander and fabricated stories, it is not always about the evidence.

I thought? what? its not always about the evidence? at this point in the Multi-trial system I would think they have evolved past the Daily Mail type garbage. Maybe not?
 
Rolfe said:
Nope. Rolfe was my cat's name. And sometimes it's fun to be ambiguous on the internet.
Click to expand...

Hence the complaint about Amanda's chromosomes, and smkovalinsky's bafflement in response. ;)

ETA: With 1 hour until the expected time of the verdict, I just want to go on record in advance, to say that I am wholly confident in the acquittal this time round. If the report is true that the jury were in tears during Amanda's "spontaneous", I don't see how it's possible that they could believe her guilty. And notwithstanding the doubts expressed by others, I find London John's reasoning that it's already decided, very convincing.
 
Last edited:
JREF2010 said:
I dont know, ...it could be like a copycat of a copycat of a copycat...you know how the media is all interconnected. I dont know which specific inc. it was.
Click to expand...

Sadly, Frank says no

"The jurors looked to be faithful to the consignment not to show any assent or dissent. Especially Hellmann, who ingratiated himself with the showing, today particularly firm, of his intimidating look, army style."

http://perugiashock.com/2011/10/03/amanda-and-raffaeles-call-for-life/
 
Kaosium said:
Where is this stuff coming from? Granted that's only two in two days, but they seem...constructed in a similar way. Flat out delusional about some things like the CCTV and the phone, which doesn't even sound like he's got the right case to others which seem to suggest a familiarity with the issue including odds things I've never seen brought up like what time they left the cottage, and finally discredited contentions like the buying bleach for a 'clean-up.' Then at the end the pretense of 'acknowledging the holes in the case.'

It's like this weird mix of The Machine and Maundy Gregory. I haven't been keeping up with my PMF and TJMK, are they up to something? Another etherwide 'campaign' this time even more divorced from the facts?
Click to expand...

Who knows. My guess is that it is either a pro guilter whack job that has put together his spiel from the posting of Harry Machine and other extremists or a pro not guilty whack job who is mocking those of the pro guilt ilk.
 
misteratunta said:
Sadly, Frank says no

"The jurors looked to be faithful to the consignment not to show any assent or dissent. Especially Hellmann, who ingratiated himself with the showing, today particularly firm, of his intimidating look, army style."

http://perugiashock.com/2011/10/03/amanda-and-raffaeles-call-for-life/
Click to expand...

Ammonitida said:
:( My hopes have been lowered.
Click to expand...


Check his Comments section - Frank appears to agree that two jurors were crying...



Edit: I see you saw it...
 
Last edited:
Aye,

I hope they don't come back with time served for Patrick Lumumba or something. I want to see full acquittal here !!!!

A confirmation is too awful to even think of!
 
Ammonitida said:
Nevermind, Frankj said this

"Two of them looked like…"

in response to a question about the crying.
Click to expand...

So what do you think he meant by
The jurors looked to be faithful to the consignment not to show any assent or dissent
Click to expand...
?

Does he write the blog in Italian and then translate it with google or similar?
 
I've put some bubbly in the fridge and we're hoping to uncork it to celebrate justice at last for these two and also justice for Meredith (who could so easily have been Amanda).

Many thanks to all of you who have provided links to evidence - I've been following this thread for ages and this time it's crystal clear they are innocent. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't looked at the evidence (and lack of it) critically or without prejudice.

To those who still say these two are guilty - where's your evidence? Nowhere, other than in the minds of sick, malicious & ignorant people whose sense of justice belongs in the middle ages with all the witch hunters & burners.
 
Draca said:
Aye,

I hope they don't come back with time served for Patrick Lumumba or something. I want to see full acquittal here !!!!

A confirmation is too awful to even think of!
Click to expand...

I could see the evidence supporting a acquittal, except for the defamation of Patrick, from a legal standpoint (not from truth and fairness).

I cant understand why the Patrick case was even included in this trial for Meredith's justice.

To defend the Patrick case is to fight the Perugia Questura event on Nov 5 /6 and this is a complete case of its own. Its a case of the Perugia Interrogators versus the Amanda.

So one thing to have a weak case and not be able to place the two students as murderers and thief's.

But imo, the Patrick/Interrigation issue is like fighting the entire Perugia police force, without any recordings or legal defense present during the interrogation its their word against her's.

I dont understand why Patricks case was included this trial? Seems odd.
 
Draca said:
Aye,

I hope they don't come back with time served for Patrick Lumumba or something. I want to see full acquittal here !!!!

A confirmation is too awful to even think of!
Click to expand...

My guess is that's the item that might actually be addressed by the Supreme Court, not any of the others. I think it reasonably possible they might return a guilty verdict on that one, however the Supreme Court of Italy may force a re-trial due to Massei overstepping his bounds and allowing the statements to be introduced to the same jury the Supreme Court had ruled it shouldn't be admissible to. That's just a thought, something that might cause the 'compromise' talk about the verdict being reported by some press.

I don't think it's going to happen, and it shouldn't as it's irrational and doesn't seem to meet the definition of the calunnia law, as if she was innocent Amanda couldn't possibly know whether Patrick was innocent, but I think it's the most likely 'split decision' out there. However, I wouldn't be terribly worried about it as it's not a major charge (like the other calunnia is) and ought to be rectified at the Supreme Court level.
 
Rolfe said:
Do we know that this "jurors moved to tears" thing is true? If it is, it's very telling indeed.

These people have been immersed in this case for months. The bottom line is, they have to decide whether Amanda and Raffaele were at the cottage that evening and involved in Meredith's murder in some way, or whether they spent the whole time at his flat, cuddling and watching films and smoking pot.

If the latter is true, then the whole thing is an appalling tragedy for two young lives. A tragedy caused by the police and criminal justice system of their own city. If that is the conclusion you have come to, then seeing Amanda plead her innocence could be a very moving spectacle.

If you think she wielded the knife that killed Meredith, not so much.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...


The jurors cried before the Dec 2009 verdict also. No counting on that to mean anything good.

It never made sense that they would leave his apt that had everything they needed to go to the cottage. The story was always ridiculous. Not that it couldn't have been true, but there was no evidence it was. :(
 
Kaosium said:
Where is this stuff coming from? Granted that's only two in two days, but they seem...constructed in a similar way. Flat out delusional about some things like the CCTV and the phone, which doesn't even sound like he's got the right case to others which seem to suggest a familiarity with the issue including odds things I've never seen brought up like what time they left the cottage, and finally discredited contentions like the buying bleach for a 'clean-up.' Then at the end the pretense of 'acknowledging the holes in the case.'

It's like this weird mix of The Machine and Maundy Gregory. I haven't been keeping up with my PMF and TJMK, are they up to something? Another etherwide 'campaign' this time even more divorced from the facts?
Click to expand...

The guilty narrative, at least here in the UK, appears to be very persuasive to casual followers of the case. I've seen it a lot in newspaper comments sections of course, but now seeing it one or two other places as well.

Lots of comments about rich Americans exploiting mistakes in forensics collection, allied to references to Knox's lies.

I've started a thread on a cricket forum, just to see what the reaction is like.
 
Apparently there are rumours that the verdict will be announced around 22:00. Also, one of Amanda's lawyers said he expects a verdict before midnight.
 
Kaosium said:
My guess is that's the item that might actually be addressed by the Supreme Court, not any of the others. I think it reasonably possible they might return a guilty verdict on that one, however the Supreme Court of Italy may force a re-trial due to Massei overstepping his bounds and allowing the statements to be introduced to the same jury the Supreme Court had ruled it shouldn't be admissible to. That's just a thought, something that might cause the 'compromise' talk about the verdict being reported by some press.

I don't think it's going to happen, and it shouldn't as it's irrational and doesn't seem to meet the definition of the calunnia law, as if she was innocent Amanda couldn't possibly know whether Patrick was innocent, but I think it's the most likely 'split decision' out there. However, I wouldn't be terribly worried about it as it's not a major charge (like the other calunnia is) and ought to be rectified at the Supreme Court level.
Click to expand...


Good analysis, as usual. I hope you're right. :)
 
Draca said:
The jurors cried before the Dec 2009 verdict also. No counting on that to mean anything good.

It never made sense that they would leave his apt that had everything they needed to go to the cottage. The story was always ridiculous. Not that it couldn't have been true, but there was no evidence it was. :(
Click to expand...

That did depends on when they cried. Did they cry during a speech by Amanda Knox?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom