• 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.
bri1 said:
I ask, because we can't just dismiss scientific results without a good reason, and intuition is not a good reason. I've done some work on how intuitions about probablity are often quite far from the truth, (e.g. the birthday paradox) and generally human intuition and pre-philosophical (or pre-scientific) reasoning can be wildly inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Intuition is merely an expression of what we want to believe rather than what we know. Since I want to believe only the truth, my intuition does not suffer from wildly inaccurateness. That is reserved for those that deny truth. Just my gut feeling, anyway.
 
Machiavelli said:
Oh yes, your roommate lies in morgue and you build a false story, you realize she might be in danger and you leave the house thinking about a mop and breakfase, you accuse an innocent man of murder an rape, you place blood on the hands of another one, you write down another false testimony bringing further false evidence against innocent people, you refuse to tell the truth for weeks, you make up a story about a false memory to justify yourself.... oh yes, benign....
please
Click to expand...

Oh yes, your roommate lies in morgue and you build a false story.
Click to expand...
There are several things wrong with this statement. The timeline is wrong. Wasn’t it the police that built the false story. Didn’t Mignini build a lot of false stories. Didn’t the press make a lot of false stories? Also, weren’t all of these false stories repeatedly suggested to Amanda when she was tired, fearful, without lawyer and grief stricken? Every read anything about brainwashing?

You realize she might be in danger and you leave the house thinking about a mop and breakfast.
Click to expand...

Assuming you mean that Amanda realizes she might be in danger and leave the house thinking about a mop and breakfast.

I’ve also sensed danger and left places before.

You place blood on the hands of another one.
You write down another false testimony bringing further false evidence against innocent people.
Click to expand...

You accuse an innocent man of murder and rape.
Click to expand...

She didn’t. The police saw a black man’s hair in Meredith’s hand, looked to Amanda’s friends and text messages. Saw the message that she would see her boss later and [the police] suggested that her boss was the killer. They might have even suggested to her that they knew it was a black man and offered her help if she identified her boss. Even with the video of the interview, this would all be conjecture. Without the video this data is sub worthless.

You refuse to tell the truth for weeks.
Click to expand...

The police refuse to believe the truth for weeks is more like it.
 
Last edited:
You make up a story about a false memory to justify yourself.
Click to expand...

http://womanonawire.blogspot.com/2011/09/unarresting-arrested-famed-fbi-profiler.html
JD stands for John Douglas, a profiler that helped the FBI with 5000 cases.

KE: What about Amanda’s confessions during the interrogations?
JD: To be interrogated from 10 pm until 6 am in the morning? These are not sophisticated young people – it would not take a dozen interrogators to break them. I know the tricks, I know what they do in there; I’ve done it. No one could hold up. I couldn’t hold up - especially over 5 days.
KE: Amanda, while under interrogation accused another man, Patrick Lumumba. Why would she have done that?

JD: The police knew they had negroid hairs at the crime scene. Amanda exchanged texts the night before with Patrick Lumumba, who's of African descent, like Guede (Note: Lumumba owned the bar where Amanda worked as a waitress. He told her she wasn't needed for work that night). Because the DNA evidence had not come back yet, they jumped to the conclusion the hairs belonged to Lumumba. They interrogated her accordingly. The tactics used was to have Amanda say what the police wanted. You get people to confess under this psychological torture.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Scorpion NITE said:
Well, that's certainly the last straw that the Guilters seem to be continuing to cling to.

If it is overturned (and there is a good possibility of that) is that then 'game over' for the Guilters? :yikes:
Click to expand...
If in the next appeal which the prosecutor is planning Knox was declared guilty, will that be 'game over' for the fans?
 
Verklagekasper said:
In real life Amanda Knox is a convicted criminal who was sentenced to three years in jail for defamation.
Click to expand...


In real life, Amanda is innocent of the murder of Meredith Kercher and is now at home in America where she is free to live her life. That's all that really matters here. Your bitterness will never change that.
 
Verklagekasper said:
In real life Amanda Knox is a convicted criminal who was sentenced to three years in jail for defamation.
Click to expand...

Read the article and stop spreading lies about how normal people act under duress.

They say American's are under-educated and over-opinionated, you my friend are proving this to be another falsehood.
 
Verklagekasper said:
If in the next appeal which the prosecutor is planning Knox was declared guilty, will that be 'game over' for the fans?
Click to expand...


You deserve an answer from me.

I'm pretty certain that most of the Innocentisti are extremely pleased that Amanda and Raffaele have been declared NOT GUILTY of murder and escaped the ridiculous 25 / 26 years sentences and, for quite a few, it was 'game over' at that stage.

Others would like the complete vindication of Amanda (to join the complete vindication of Raffaele who has no charges left against him - remember him?) so will wait to see what transpires. It certainly would not be 'game over' for them in any sense as the main objective has been achieved - much to the chagrin of the Guilters.

Happy? :D:D
 
Swimfish said:
Read the article and stop spreading lies about how normal people act under duress.

They say American's are under-educated and over-opinionated, you my friend are proving this to be another falsehood.
Click to expand...
I suggest that you just waterboard anyone who doesn't think that your darling is innocent.
 
My only uncertainty in this case was why did Amanda accuse her boss, a black man, when Guede was a black man. Did she stumble on the crime while or shortly after it happened? I always wondered this.

Then I read where negroid hairs were found at the crime scene.

JD: The police knew they had negroid hairs at the crime scene. Amanda exchanged texts the night before with Patrick Lumumba, who's of African descent, like Guede (Note: Lumumba owned the bar where Amanda worked as a waitress. He told her she wasn't needed for work that night). Because the DNA evidence had not come back yet, they jumped to the conclusion the hairs belonged to Lumumba. They interrogated her accordingly. The tactics used was to have Amanda say what the police wanted. You get people to confess under this psychological torture.
Click to expand...

So enen this last subtle doubt/question has been explained. The police were looking for a black man. The police suggested it was a black man. The police wrote the first 'confession', did they not?
 
Verklagekasper said:
I suggest that you just waterboard anyone who doesn't think that your darling is innocent.
Click to expand...

Read the article, get educated, then respond. Is it that hard? It will only take a few minutes. You may even learn something about yourself.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
And shocked you should be. Experienced interrogators will tell you that they get their best results when the subject is kept relaxed and happy. Of course, you won't see such techniques on tv because it doesn't make for good drama.
Click to expand...

So there is a great show on A&E called "The First 48" which follows homocide detectives around while filming them. They cover real cases and often times show real interrogations.

And you're absolutely right. The detectives always start with the "soft" approach. Often times they will get an outright confession without getting angry and without really pressuring the suspect, but just being nice and listening.

Sometimes that doesn't work so they end up challenging them a bit more. Certainly they don't hit them. They can lie to them as well but this is also usually not done unless everything else has failed.

This show has a lot of episodes...

Here is the IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0423652/

On the subject of TV, I wonder if Amanda will end up on the show "Lock up abroad"?
 
Verklagekasper said:
I suggest that you just waterboard anyone who doesn't think that your darling is innocent.
Click to expand...


Advocating violence against other members is definitely against the membership rules. I suggest that you retract such statements and attack the arguments instead of the arguers.
 
Hope Knox does not ever set foot in an Italian prison again:

Amanda Knox: I was sexually harassed in prison
(CBS News) Amanda Knox is revealing that during her four-year ordeal behind bars she was sexually harassed by a high-ranking Italian prison administrator, "48 Hours Mystery" correspondent Peter Van Sant reported on "The Early Show."
Knox returned to her home in Seattle this week after an Italian appeals court overturned her conviction in the murder of her British roommate in 2007.

A letter written by Knox gives details of the manipulation and sexual intimidation she says she endured while in prison.

"We learn about sexual harassment inside prison where an administrator would take her up to his office alone at night and say a number of inappropriate things to her, and that left Amanda terrified," Van Sant said on "The Early Show" in advance of a report to air on Saturday night's "48 Hours Mystery,"
Click to expand...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/07/earlyshow/main20117116.shtml
 
RoseMontague said:
Intuition is merely an expression of what we want to believe rather than what we know. Since I want to believe only the truth, my intuition does not suffer from wildly inaccurateness. That is reserved for those that deny truth. Just my gut feeling, anyway.
Click to expand...

I think you are not quite right there, although the process of drawing a conclusion based on intuition probably includes an aspect of exercising a self interest bias. br1 hit on something that I have been thinking about as I have considered the different views of the interrogation and how people arrive at such different viewpoints of the same set of facts.

I think all of us, regardless of what our beliefs are about the interrogation evidence formed our initial view of this evidence based on intuition. We then went in search of evidence to confirm our intuition based belief. The problem with intuition is that confirmation bias and self interest bias are always part of the process and sometimes our intuition messes with our ability to observe the world objectively.

I do not want to imply that people can not overcome their intuition based beliefs by objective reasoning. I think they can and do but the process is difficult even for people that might qualify as critical thinkers.

I think that one of the reasons this thread has been so acrimonious at times is because it pits people with different intuition based beliefs against each other and I think we are the most emotionally involved in defending the validity of our intuition. If we have incontrovertible facts to base our beliefs on we can just calmly explain the nature of the geometric logic that lies at the base of our view and others can either decide to accept that reality or reject it, but our intuition is not challenged.
 
JREF2010 said:
I hope Maresca pursues the Calunnia trial, because this will bring greater light into what happened in the questura/interrogation.

When there are 10 or more people involved, its almost impossible for them all to maintain a perfect lie. So if all those present at the interrogation are truly questioned a new version will emerge.
We dont know the full details, Massei had Migninni do an investigation...what a joke that was. An unbiased investigation would be interesting.

I see a news article mentions the interrogation, from Curt Knox.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/knox-hit-during-interrogation-claims-father-20111007-1ldli.html
Click to expand...


I fear that this is incredibly - and optimistically - idealistic. These police officers have now had almost four years to meet and communicate freely. I would be utterly astonished if they haven't decided on a very detailed narrative of the events of that night, and if they haven't ensured that every single person on the police side of the case is totally conversant with that narrative.

In my opinion, if this case actually is prosecuted as planned, the only hope for Knox will be if the judge believes that the police have withheld evidence (specifically an audio or video recording of the interview) from the courts. Otherwise I cannot see any path to acquittal for Knox on this charge, in the way that I see a clear path to acquittal on the Lumumba slander charge. But I get the feeling that judges in Italy may decide that it is not in the public interest to try this case anyhow - if that's the case, it will never reach a courtroom again, and would either be struck from the record or held on file.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom