Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[bees]

Have we really come to a place on a skeptic forum where we're concerned about her to the point where we care what time the plane lands?

I'm sure we're going to be riveted by the whole scene, while hungry children die, murderous thugs rape and pillage the human race and the environment and hardworking people can't find a decent job.

But as long as we give this hottie her 15 minutes, we're all good.

Wake me when it ends.

I'm interested in when her flight lands and she finally gets home. Can't you just skip posts that don't interest you personally?

 

[Micromegas]

I think it is important to understand that the ILE were convinced of her guilt before the interrogation and accusation. The police chief said that they questioned her until she buckled and told them what they knew to be correct.

First you say they were convinced of her guilt, then you say she told them what they wanted to hear, namely that Patrick Lumumba was the killer.

Hey, it's a done deal now. I just wanted to point out that it wasn't the cartwheels and vibrator that made me suspect Knox wasn't on the up and up. I admit I was a little put off by Knox playing blame-the-black-guy when the cops turned up the heat.

-Mike

 

[LondonJohn]

It seems like the issue of what the exact meaning of the not guilty verdict is one that can be determined categorically but it remains in dispute here.

1. Did Hellman specifically refer to 530.1 in the verdict? I just listened to a translation and I didn't hear him explicitly refer to 530.1.

2. Even if he didn't was his statement that the crime was not committed equivalent to a finding based on 530.1?

3. Bolint has stated that Italian law does not recognize two different kinds of not guilty verdicts any more. This is contradicted by a news article I saw and the apparent belief by Mignini that Italian law does recognize two different kinds of not guilty verdicts based on his discussion of 530.1 and 530.2. But it seems like Bolint didn't make up his claim out of thin air so what's going on here?

It seems like this issue might be important with regards to any civil trials remaining. Not guilty by reason of insufficient evidence to meet a beyond a reasonable doubt criteria might still leave open the possibility for a civil claim based on a preponderance of the evidence finding.

Disclaimer: From my perspective, this is all a bit academic. For all practical purposes a conclusion that RS/AK are completely innocent is justified.

1. Apparently Hellmann said it later in a clarification of the verdict.

2. Yes, the wording of the courtroom verdict announcement made it explicitly clear that the acquittals were on the basis that the accused people (i.e. Knox and Sollecito) did not commit the crime. This, by definition, means that they were acquitted under 530.1, not 530.2.

3. Bolint is wrong.

And yes, it is all a bit academic. As you say, the important fact is that Knox and Sollecito were acquitted; and the rider to that is the fact that Hellmann made it very clear that they were not acquitted on reasonable doubt grounds, but rather on the grounds that they did not commit the crimes at all. Mignini knows this full well, and all intelligent observers of the Italian criminal justice system know this full well.

 

[NewtonTrino]

Oh, well, all right then.

Um, just out of curiosity, when a person blames someone else for a crime, you really consider that a confession?

-Mike

Well it's a form of false confession. Basically she told the police what they were badgering her to tell them. I certainly don't think she confessed to the crime in any way shape or form but she did "break" during interrogation.

 

[NoahFence]

I'm interested in when her flight lands and she finally gets home. Can't you just skip posts that don't interest you personally?

Change her name from Amanda to Andy, and make her a 40 something beer gut dude, and nobody cares about this story.

This is a fact.

That's what eats me. Why anybody would care about what time her plane lands is beyond me. But hey, feel free to waste brain cells watching the aerial coverage from the airport to her house.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Have we really come to a place on a skeptic forum where we're concerned about her to the point where we care what time the plane lands?

I'm sure we're going to be riveted by the whole scene, while hungry children die, murderous thugs rape and pillage the human race and the environment and hardworking people can't find a decent job.

But as long as we give this hottie her 15 minutes, we're all good.

Wake me when it ends.

It is very condescending to assume anyone wants to give this "hottie" her "15 minutes of fame". Even skeptics have an interest in a human being whom they have invested great thought and time in. Insulting others is not the mark of a skeptic; just rude and unnecessary.

 

[NewtonTrino]

Actually, I do. And a very good friend of mine owns a private charter business. The could probably have hired a 10-seat private charter from Perugia to SeaTac for a one-way cost of something in the region of $30,000-$50,000. The aircraft would almost certainly have had to refuel in Nova Scotia, but a decent plane could have done the total journey in around 10-11 hours.

By contrast, 6 rooms in a reasonable hotel in Rome overnight (assuming some sharing of rooms) would be maybe £1,000. 10 last-minute full-fare flights Rome-LHR would be around $300 each = $3,000 total. 10 last-minute full-fare flights LHR-SEA would be around $1,500 (current BA one-way quote for tomorrow's LHR-SEA flight is £1,050 for the cheapest economy seat) = $15,000 total. So total travel costs for the group would have been around $20,000.

So the answer is yes, of course it's still cheaper to do things via commercial flights and overnight stays in hotels. But it's not an order of magnitude different. And that's also assuming that all the commercial flight sectors are in economy (coach) class. If we are talking about seats in business class (let alone first class), then there is probably a near parity in costs.

I don't want to beat the dead horse but $20k is pretty different than $30-50k. For a family that's already had to pony up for a lot of costs I doubt it's something they would even have considered.

Hopefully the can end up getting paid something to pay back all the costs and get Amanda started on her life with a bit of a nest egg. I think she has an opportunity to use this experience as a springboard into doing something meaningful.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Change her name from Amanda to Andy, and make her a 40 something beer gut dude, and nobody cares about this story.

This is a fact.

That's what eats me. Why anybody would care about what time her plane lands is beyond me. But hey, feel free to waste brain cells watching the aerial coverage from the airport to her house.

I would want to see Andy's plane land, and watch his fat 40-ish self be welcomed home in the name of justice served.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

English translation of the Conti-Vecchiotti report

Kudos again to komponisto and katy_did for their work on translating this report. It greatly helped English language posters understand where the DNA profiling went off the rails.

 

[JREF2010]

Anyone know when Amanda's plane will land in Seattle?

>Knox flew from Rome to London, where she took a direct flight to Seattle, flying business class with full-length seat and menu options including champagne, smoked salmon and prawn salad.

At least nine members of media organizations were on board, but a British Airways attendant on the flight blocked them from the plane's secluded upper deck "to preserve the privacy" of passengers. The attendant, quoting a Knox family member, said media were not allowed to contact Knox or her family on the flight but were welcome to attend a press conference later in Seattle.

>Will hold news conference at airport at 5:45pm PDT

here's bits and pieces

 

[NoahFence]

It is very condescending to assume anyone wants to give this "hottie" her "15 minutes of fame". Even skeptics have an interest in a human being whom they have invested great thought and time in. Insulting others is not the mark of a skeptic; just rude and unnecessary.

Well if you're in it for the human interest story it doesn't apply to you. However, my rants are against society at large, not JREF. On that account, I'm not wrong.

 

[bees]

Change her name from Amanda to Andy, and make her a 40 something beer gut dude, and nobody cares about this story.

If she were a "40 something beer gut dude" she wouldn't have been subject to such a mediaeval, misogynistic character assassination.

Why anybody would care about what time her plane lands is beyond me. But hey, feel free to waste brain cells watching the aerial coverage from the airport to her house.

Why anyone would want to watch Dancing with the Stars is beyond me but I wouldn't suggest they are wasting their brain cells on it. It's about personal interest and that's not the same for everybody.

 

[snook1]

I care for her flight beacuse I care for her homecoming.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Leiterman's conviction did not make sense to me, either

Change her name from Amanda to Andy, and make her a 40 something beer gut dude, and nobody cares about this story.

This is a fact.

NoahFence,

In a response to one of your comments, I pointed out some forensic errors in this case, just as I have pointed out errors in the Leiterman conviction for the murder of Jane Mixer. Gary Leiterman looks to be a good sixty (not sure about the gut). None of the commenters here are responsible for giving this case the level of attention it has received in the media. However, once I saw that the prosecution's version of events did not make sense on several levels, I was not able to walk away.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Well if you're in it for the human interest story it doesn't apply to you. However, my rants are against society at large, not JREF. On that account, I'm not wrong.

No, can be intellectually objective while maintaining human interest side. I am in complete sympathy about the state of the world; but I believe what Schopenhauer believed: There is no curing it; it is and will remain the nature of this world to be purely negative (in the sense of bad outweighing good, and justice and depth and truth being exceptions to the rule of appetite and chaos).

 

[JREF2010]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/04/amanda-knox-juror-speaks-out

One of the juror/Judges speaks... maybe this is already posted?

 

[Micromegas]

Well it's a form of false confession. Basically she told the police what they were badgering her to tell them. I certainly don't think she confessed to the crime in any way shape or form but she did "break" during interrogation.

They were "badgering" her to implicate Lumumba? Wouldn't it seem more, um, confessional if she had said she did it, and the the lack of evidence against her later refuted the statement?

-Mike

 

[Grinder]

There's a live chat going on with Barbie Nadeau right now:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...al-verdict-on-murder-of-meredith-kercher.html

Why, why, why did I go there? She is so clueless it is truly beyond belief.

Comment From Tina
Nobody seems to be mentioning the morning after the murder when Amanda and Raffaele were seen with buckets and bleach and such. That is highly incriminating, at least tampering with evidence. And wasn't that one of the decisions overturned? Will the rest of the evidence, circumstantial though it may be, come back into play at the next level?
2:19

BARBIE LATZA NADEAU: Mops, buckets, rocks, receipts are all circumstantial evidence, and it seems very much so to this appellate panel. The first court considered these elements crucial. The second court clearly did not.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Nadeau on the multiple attacker theory

Comment From Guest
How strong was the evidence to support the theory of more than one killer?
2:16


BARBIE LATZA NADEAU:
Multiple autopsy reports pointed to more than one attacker.
2:16


Comment From Lisa
What evidence in the murder room convinces you that there were 3 attackers? Or are you convinced of that?
2:17


BARBIE LATZA NADEAU:
I studied the crime scene video and autopsy photos multiple times with a seasoned crime coroner who was persuasive in convincing me that there was more than one attacker based on her wounds and lack of defensive wounds.
2:17

 

[NoahFence]

NoahFence,

In a response to one of your comments, I pointed out some forensic errors in this case, just as I have pointed out errors in the Leiterman conviction for the murder of Jane Mixer. Gary Leiterman looks to be a good sixty (not sure about the gut). None of the commenters here are responsible for giving this case the level of attention it has received in the media. However, once I saw that the prosecution's version of events did not make sense on several levels, I was not able to walk away.

Gary who?
That's my point.

Was there absurd media coverage regarding the case of Gary Leiterman? I honestly can't recall the name.