• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
bolint said:
"They both spoke warmly and passionately about each other at all times during the trials process"

Yes, during thre trial.
And they supported each other famously warmly after the discovery of the murder.

But now not even a litlle unca-nunca?
Click to expand...


What?? I think you need to step back and reconsider your argument here.
 
objectivity

Nogbad said:
I have taken no sides in this long running saga on here and think given the paucity of evidence that the acquittal was the correct decision. However, this thread made me uncomfortable. It is not a nice place. If you think the post I highlighted is acceptable then we have different compasses. I will leave you guys to it.
Click to expand...
Nogbad,

The Kercher family believes that there were multiple attackers. I was persuaded by a number of things, not the least of which was Ron Hendry's analysis, that there was just one. Their confusion is coming through to me more palpably than it did before. I believe that the family of any murder victim is likely to have an especially hard time being objective about the facts of their case. Judging by the comments here, I am not the only one who is thinking along these lines.
 
Do we know that the boy friends phone was shut off on the night of the murder. Also, at what point was Amanda's phone turned off.
 
Fine said:
__________________

John,

This sheer perversity of the animosity might explain another unusual circumstance, another "dot" to connect..........

Yesterday was unseasonably warm in Perugia, 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Reporters complained the courtroom was hot. To hear the verdict Amanda entered wearing a long, bulky, coat. She never took it off during the hearing. (Have you ever seen Amanda not remove her coat?) No one else was wearing a coat in the courtroom. Hmmm.

The video: HERE

///
Click to expand...

So ... had the precaution of putting Knox in a bullet-proof vest been taken?
 
Caper said:
Do we know that the boy friends phone was shut off on the night of the murder. Also, at what point was Amanda's phone turned off.
Click to expand...

It is not sure that her phone was off. There was no recorded traffic, that's sure. And she claimed that she had turned it off after answering Lumumba's SMS.

As for Raffaele, he says that his phone was always turned on.
Yet, he did not receive his father's SMS at 23:14 whent it was sent, only at 6:02AM the next morning proving that his phone was not reachable during the night and it was turned on at shortly before 6:02AM.
 
Last edited:
I had hoped the Kerchers would have canceled their press conference. They, of course, had every right to speak out. As I said earlier I wished they would have complained from the very beginning about the media coverage and asked that the media not use inflammatory language when describing the crime and the suspects (later defendants).

The entire handling of the case, starting with the police and prosecutorial leaks to the press, was in bad form. Sex game, satanic, ritual all words that appeared over and over with the tag line that Meredith did nothing wrong. The tag led people to think she did something wrong. I do think they overdid how much better a person Meredith was than Amanda. They, the ILE and the media, narrowed the possibilities too quickly and created the one and only possible scenario for the crime.

It is sad now to see the Kerchers wondering who the other killers were given that the court ruled there were more. I wonder how it has been explained to them that no significant DNA was found in Meredith's room of anybody but RG and Meredith.

I would hope that they now ask for the semen to be tested. If they truly believe there were more people, how about Kokomani? I'd them to ask about Curatolo and when prosecutors became aware of his heroin dealing problems.

I like them to ask about what witness information the police had found on their own within a month of the murder.

I without a doubt believe their number one wish is to find the truth. In order to do that they need to press the ILE to explain and release the investigation information.

They need, so-to-speak, the garage contents made public.
 
bri1 said:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=220937

Nice to see the other JREF-ers are being as warm and welcoming as usual. Ugh.
Click to expand...

The classic denouement is about 5% the length of the book. This case lasted 4 years. That means we could take 2.4 months to end this. The appeal took 2 years, so the appeal denouement should take a month.

People want us to walk away from the end of the story. Who walks out during the denouement?

I want to see the arrival in Seattle and the first talk show interview with Amanda. I want to see the acceptance of the Kerchers.
 
Last edited:
Voluntariness

The issue of voluntariness was the key issue in the slander charge: did Knox voluntarily accuse Lumumba?

Legally, though, it is unclear to me how this issue played out in the court:

1. Is the issue of voluntariness an element of a criminal charge of slander; or, is the declarant strictly liable for her words (regardless of whether coerced or not)?

2. Is the issue of voluntariness an element of the prosecution's case, so that the prosecution has the burden of proving voluntariness as a part of its case, which must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt?

3. Or, is the issue of (in)voluntariness an affirmative defense that the defendant asserts and must prove? And if so, by what standard must the defense be proved?

4. Is voluntariness an evidentiary issue, so that an involuntary statement is inadmissible? And if so, then what role has the Supreme Court's prior decision regarding the admissibility of Knox's statements played in the conviction, i.e., did the Supreme Court conceivably already--perhaps unwittingly--dispose of the voluntariness issue when it addressed the denial of counsel issue?

It seems to me that if either of nos. 3 and 4 apply here, then Knox was facing an insurmountable burden in defending against the slander charge. The interesting thing in both cases, though, is that the Motivation may end up detailing extensive evidence concerning the facts of the interrogation, and conceivably this could end up looking very bad for the Perugian cops. Although unlikely, I think that it is even possible in either of these scenarios that Hellmann/Zanetti could conclude that she was mistreated and even hit on the head, and still come out with a finding of guilt on the slander charge. For example, what if they say that she was mistreated, but due to the prior Supreme Court decision, the appeals court was bound to admit the coerced statement for purposes of the slander case, and having done so, is bound to convict? That could put a very messy issue in the lap of the Supreme Court, and if I were Hellmann/Zanetti, I would be tempted to dump this issue there.

I will be very interested to see how Hellmann and Zanetti handle this issue.
 
Last edited:
I was wondering about the rules regarding free speech in US. Given the current verdict, are people still free to call her "murderer", "student killer" etc. or shall they expect a lawsuit?


ETA: Also, is there a chance of stopping the distribution of the lifetime movie? If no, is she entitled to any earnings for using her name :)?
 
Last edited:
What next?

The verdict will be appealed clearly.
In about mid February.

The prosecution seems to concentrate on questioning the C&V report.
They may even be successful with that.
They are waiting for the Motivations to dissect it.
They may even be successful with that, too.


I think, however, that they seriously have to think over their case.
They have to understand, that even though they won the first trial, Massei had a very difficult job and the same arguments may not be enough at the Cassazione.

Lyle Kercher said that it's back to square one.
But not only for them, square one for the prosecutors, too.

So they don't have to wait for the Motivations, it is time to build a new case without preconception and this could be best done with new people.
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Here's something I missed from the Kercher press conference today. According to a report in the Guardian,


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/04/amanda-knox-prosecutor-vows-appeal?newsfeed=true


So apparently (if this report is accurate) Sollecito's father (who was seated very close to the Kerchers in the courtroom) wanted to say some words with the Kerchers - words which would have been conciliatory and commiserating, judging from his words on the courthouse steps afterwards. But Maresca physically stopped him from doing so. Why am I not surprised?
Click to expand...

For once, I'm going to side with Maresca.

There may be a time to reach out in reconciliation, but that was not the time. Think of it, you have just learned that two people who you are convinced murdered your daughter in an unusually-horrible way are going to be able to walk free and going to be able to lead normal lives, and the father of one of those (presumed) killers, about to take his child home with him, is now wanting to talk to you? I would almost think Maresca was right in stopping him for his own protection. If I had been one of the Kerchers, believing what they did...well, I think the Perugia authorities might have had another murder case on their hands that very night.
 
Amanda Knox appeal continues – so do the lies

Little attention has been paid to the details of Amanda Knox’s confession, where initially she pointed the finger at Patrick Lumumba, the owner of Le Chic, where the American student worked part time. Lumumba was arrested solely on the strength of her confession, and held for thirteen days before he was cleared of any involvement in the crime and released, not because Knox retracted that part of her confession, but because the Italian police did a thorough job.
...
Knox claims she was abused by the police and threatened with thirty years in gaol if she didn’t confess. And if she did confess to a murder they’d let her go? It is of course sadly well documented that innocent people sometimes confess to quite horrendous crimes, even freely and voluntarily, but the claims or inference of brutality and psychological torture made by Knox against the Italian police have been shown to have no substance; even so, they have been repeated uncritically by her supporters, and her parents have now been ordered to stand trial for libel.
...
“[The] greatest misconception in this case is that most Americans believe that absolutely no forensic evidence was presented in court...” She added that in spite of her poor perception by the Italian media and the jury, and the mistakes made by the police, Knox received a fair trial, and that although her appeal stands some chance of success, “if the police had not made one mistake, you’d still have the same verdict, I think you’d just have less controversy”.
Click to expand...
http://digitaljournal.com/article/309738
 
bolint said:
"They both spoke warmly and passionately about each other at all times during the trials process"

Yes, during thre trial.
And they supported each other famously warmly after the discovery of the murder.

But now not even a litlle unca-nunca?
Click to expand...

I think bolint is bitterly disappointed that they didn't run to each other, passionately embrace, and exclaim "Isn't it amazing? We got away with it!" :p
 
bolint said:
What next?

The verdict will be appealed clearly.
In about mid February.

The prosecution seems to concentrate on questioning the C&V report.
They may even be successful with that.
They are waiting for the Motivations to dissect it.
They may even be successful with that, too.


I think, however, that they seriously have to think over their case.
They have to understand, that even though they won the first trial, Massei had a very difficult job and the same arguments may not be enough at the Cassazione.

Lyle Kercher said that it's back to square one.
But not only for them, but square one for the prosecutors, too.

So they don't have to wait for the Motivations, it is time to build a new case without preconception and this could be best done with new people.
Click to expand...

There are other factors.

Mignini's own appeal is due very soon. I expect him to be removed. I think an investigation of his office is also likely to take place. The real prosecutor what's his name is not going to be that happy with further appealing this trainwreck of a case. The only possible appeal would be the for the calunia conviction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom