Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kaosium]

Aww, great to see her out and about!

Indeed it is.

I see they're wondering if she died her hair, heh. One thing I did agree with Michael about concerning the case is I had trouble identifying Amanda from picture to picture. Her hair seems to change color, her face seems different sometimes--and I don't mean the ones where they're trying to make her look funny either. Even in the normal ones it seems she's a different girl from one to another.

 

[CDHost]

What I'd like to know is, when are we going to see the wrongs of the case put right? Why are Amanda's lawyers not taking action to shut down the malicious, libellous websites? Only yesterday TJMK put out an article claiming "the evidence still points to Amanda Knox" - how is it possible for them to go on making false accusations like this?

I see you are a brit. The definition of libel in the US is pretty stringent. I think PMF and TJMK cross it in their discussions, including directed at me, I haven't seen them cross it in their articles. Further, the interest in the Amanda Knox case is quite often mixed with political topics having to do with criminal justice and foreign policy.

Finally libel is a civil fine, you pay money. The government does not shut down a press for libel.

What is the chance of seeing an enquiry into police and prosecution misdeeds? Do we have to wait until the Hellmann motivation report and the Supreme Court ruling before anything else happens?

Depends on Berlusconi / PDL. There is no reason to believe the PD has an interest in investigating Mignini. This is a nice stick for the PDL to beat up on PD local officials with since it will have international support.

 

[Grinder]

One thing I like about Italian law is that libel/slander are crimes unlike the US where they are only civil cases.

The real problem here is that after proving the statements were made knowing they were false then the victim needs to prove damage. Even in the cases where the sites not only lied about a poster but also "outed" him, it still needs to shown how this damaged the individual.

In the cases where these people contacted employers or where employers were made aware of the postings the cases would be easier in proving damage, particularly if they were sanctioned or fired.

Steve Moore may have a cause of action against the poster and the moderators/owners of the sites if Pepperdine received emails or other communication from these people that he can argue contributed to his employment situation.

 

[Didaktylos]

BTW - when can we expect the Motivations Report to be issued and how much longer after that before Cassazione (spelling?) consider the case?

 

[Freddy]

One thing I like about Italian law is that libel/slander are crimes unlike the US where they are only civil cases.

After seeing how such charges have been abused in this case alone, both through actual and threatened prosecutions, how can you say this?

 

[Grinder]

After seeing how such charges have been abused in this case alone, both through actual and threatened prosecutions, how can you say this?

Any law can be abused by LE.

If someone lies about another, particularly in a public forum, I think that having it be a crime is appropriate. How much of a penalty should be attached would vary for me and the Italian sentences seem excessive.

If I were falsely accused of a crime by someone not being illegally interviewed by the police I would like that person to be charged with a crime. In fact, we may have such laws here and they may fall under perjury laws or lying to an investigative agency.

Without dealing with all the details, I know that's where the devil is, I would like to see lying be elevated in the US regarding penalties.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Indeed it is.

I see they're wondering if she died her hair, heh. One thing I did agree with Michael about concerning the case is I had trouble identifying Amanda from picture to picture. Her hair seems to change color, her face seems different sometimes--and I don't mean the ones where they're trying to make her look funny either. Even in the normal ones it seems she's a different girl from one to another.

Yes. She has a myriad of looks; I had noticed her changing looks from court date to court date, too.

 

[smkovalinksy]

BTW - when can we expect the Motivations Report to be issued and how much longer after that before Cassazione (spelling?) consider the case?

I had wondered this, too. I heard Hellman say at the end of his ruling that the court had 90 days to issue the report. So January, or end of? And then I assumed Mignini et al could immediately make a request to the high court. Not absolutely sure, though; maybe someone else is.

 

[Freddy]

Any law can be abused by LE.

If someone lies about another, particularly in a public forum, I think that having it be a crime is appropriate. How much of a penalty should be attached would vary for me and the Italian sentences seem excessive.

If I were falsely accused of a crime by someone not being illegally interviewed by the police I would like that person to be charged with a crime. In fact, we may have such laws here and they may fall under perjury laws or lying to an investigative agency.

Without dealing with all the details, I know that's where the devil is, I would like to see lying be elevated in the US regarding penalties.

Some laws are more susceptible to abuse than others. Some are so certain to be abused that they should never be enacted. Are you familiar with the Sedition Act of 1798? It only criminalized "lies."

I could perhaps agree with you if this hypothetical law excluded from its scope any and all alleged "lies" about the government or government officials. Otherwise it would almost certainly be held to violate the First Amendment. American Courts give wide latitude to any speech that is even arguably political in nature.

But at the same time, I think that far too much behavior is already criminalized, so I don't generally favor adding to the list. I am fine with monetary damages for knowingly lying about people. As Aquinas said (since he was mentioned earlier), the law does not and ought not prohibit every vice. This is especially true of the criminal law.

 

[smkovalinksy]

That's one swamp I'm very hesitant to wade into, but I'll give it a shot. I think there are several different types of guilters. I think that for some it is the tendency to view all criminal defendants as guilty and all acquittals as the work of sleazy, high-priced defense attorneys (see Grace, Nancy).

I think that for others the power of first impressions, which in this case came from tabloids repeating what prosecution sources were telling them, also goes a long way toward explaining the guilters. I think the prosecution leaks were designed to create such a first impression. I think the goal was to win the case. I think that this type of guilter is the most likely to come around.

Still others are just trolls looking for shock-value. I put Coulter into this category. I don't think she cares whether they're guilty or innocent.

I suppose there probably are some who see "University of Washington" and the sex and the pot and think that she must be guilty because she's a depraved liberal. But I think this is by far the smallest category, at least among American guilters. I can't think of anyone who I would definitely say believes this. Perhaps Ann Coulter, but as I said I view her more as an attention-seeking troll. I tend to view Mignini's comments along these lines as primarily a cynical ploy. Though I don't doubt that he views drugs and premarital sex as depraved, I think his main motivation was personal aggrandizement. He wanted to win an infamous case. If Rudy Guede acted alone, it was too mundane, despite the brutality of the crime.

I can't speak to the Italian guilters' motivations, except to say that to acknowledge innocence is to acknowledge how dysfunctional the Italian justice system is. Maybe a significant number of them think that sex and marijuana turn people into brutal murderers, but I kind of doubt it.

Responded to this already, but one thing I wanted to add in the way of an addendum: The part I highlighted in red in your post, above, I find more frightening, and to be more of the Nazi-like police-state mentality, than the idea of the old world values fighting the new. I once heard Nancy Grace say that she saw no need for defense attorneys at all. Appalling.

 

[Machiavelli]

Wow, just wow. There are numerous cases of coerced false confessions in the U.S. Not all these cases are analagout to the Knox case - primarily because both the police and charged spoke English, but I think you're poo pooing the pressure that people can feel while incarcerated and being interrogated. The reality show Take the Money and Run featured adults, who knew they were participating in a game show, who were interrogated much less harshly than Amanda was, and, again, who had English speaking interrogators. About half the time they broke and told the police where they had hid their prize money just by virtue of incarceration or mild interrogation alone.

People will admit to a lot of things to make the interrogation stop. To suggest otherwise, or to suggest that after many hours of interrogation you memories can become conflated or even invented is nonsense.

I think if you followed the logic of the arguments, you would understand that this is not the point.
The people may well admit to false things easilly.
But they do not believe to these false things easilly. They do not develop false memories about these things.

Having a memory of something is not the same of admitting things to make the interrogation stop.
It is something totally different.

 

[Machiavelli]

@ Machiavelli
I cant believe you would compare your experience and how you handled it as a man from Italy - to a young woman visiting your country from America. As if she should behave like you would. Ridiculous !
Whats more amazing is how your actually willing to admit she was probably slapped as though it's no big deal, let's just move on to how she acted afterwards.

Seem's to me at that point she had begun to learn her lesson in Italian Justice and was starting to accept the new truth she was being programed for. A few more slaps to the head and you could have gotten her to blame her parents for the murder.
If only they knew about Rudy they could have cut off her finger and made some real progress.
Bottom line: After the very first slap this meeting is over!! I don't care how you veiw her actions afterwards. Calling Rose ugly only reflects more on your ill behavior towards woman. You must not have any sisters/daughters to realize how we see this.

I did not call RoseMontague ugly.
You maybe missed the word "not". But I am used to the constant twisting of facts among the innocentisti community.

Moreover, I think RoseMontague is a man.

And, I have a younger sister.


Yes I only care of what Knox did afterwards (by the way also what she said before but that's another issue). This is the key topic to me.

 

[Freddy]

Responded to this already, but one thing I wanted to add in the way of an addendum: The part I highlighted in red in your post, above, I find more frightening, and to be more of the Nazi-like police-state mentality, than the idea of the old world values fighting the new. I once heard Nancy Grace say that she saw no need for defense attorneys at all. Appalling.

Of course she doesn't see the need for defense attorneys. She also doesn't see the need not to suborn perjury or withhold exculpatory evidence.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Of course she doesn't see the need for defense attorneys. She also doesn't see the need not to suborn perjury or withhold exculpatory evidence.

........
.............

 

[Katody Matrass]

I think if you followed the logic of the arguments, you would understand that this is not the point.
The people may well admit to false things easilly.
But they do not believe to these false things easilly. They do not develop false memories about these things.

Having a memory of something is not the same of admitting things to make the interrogation stop.
It is something totally different.

Internalisation of false confessions is a fact confirmed by real life criminal cases. It is a phenomenon reproducible and confirmed in lab experiments.

Amanda's coerced false confession comes with clear indicators of internalisation.

Simple as that.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I did not call RoseMontague ugly.
You maybe missed the word "not". But I am used to the constant twisting of facts among the innocentisti community.

Moreover, I think RoseMontague is a man.

And, I have a younger sister.


Yes I only care of what Knox did afterwards (by the way also what she said before but that's another issue). This is the key topic to me.

What, pray, does Rose being a man have to do with your younger sister????

 

[Machiavelli]

I'm not arguing, you're the expert on Italian ways.


Again, I don't want to argue about definitions. I'm sure your definitions of misconduct and corruption allow you to say that neither of it occurred.

What I want to say in a most straightforward way is that the cops hit Amanda on the head, yelled at her, lied to her and threatened her throughout the night, causing extreme stress, exhaustion etc. Call it and define it as you wish, you can call it Perugian hospitality. What I say is that was the direct cause of her false confession and lasting confusion.

What I want to say, instead, is that the cops did not yell at her, they probably hit her twice on the head calling her stupid liar (to her benefit, since she was), they did not lie to her, they repeated her they did not believe her, and at a certain point they told her that Sollecito withdrew her alibi.
They also told her they believed she had met with someone (they assumed, the murderer) and that he was the person to which she texted.

They did not do that through the night. They did this between 23:00 and 1:30 at best which is two an a half hours.

And this caused no mental confusion. It only caused a series of further lies. And she told these lied out of any coercion and without any interrogation.

I also say that there is evidence there has been no mental confusion, and there is evidence there was a series of lies. Some of which unrelated to any police questioning.

 

[Machiavelli]

Internalisation of false confessions is a fact confirmed by real life criminal cases. It is a phenomenon reproducible and confirmed in lab experiments.

Amanda's coerced false confession comes with clear indicators of internalisation.

Simple as that.

Well, whenever the innocentisti claimed this theory, I was addressed by them to scientific literature which it happened to say the opposite.

 

[Ammonitida]

I think if you followed the logic of the arguments, you would understand that this is not the point.
The people may well admit to false things easilly.
But they do not believe to these false things easilly. They do not develop false memories about these things.

Having a memory of something is not the same of admitting things to make the interrogation stop.
It is something totally different.

You must not be aware of the empirical scientific studies that demonstrate how easy it is to create false memories in people.
Here's one such study;

Scientists have planted false memories into people's minds in a study that demonstrates just how easy it is to for police to convince people they have witnessed something that did not actually happen.

More than a third of people are susceptible to false memories, according to studies by Elizabeth Loftus, professor of psychology at the University of California. Her experiments could explain why so many people in Washington DC said they saw a white van near to the scene of last year's sniper shootings. In fact, the snipers used a dark Chevrolet Caprice and no white van was involved.

"Where did that white van come from? It came from the fact that someonetalked to the media and suddenly the whole country is looking for a white van that perhaps did not exist," she said.

In one study, Professor Loftus implanted a false memory in the minds of volunteers who had visited Disneyland as children. "We have tried to come up with ways of planting memories that could not have happened. We try to make people believe that when they went to Disneyland they managed to shake hands with Bugs Bunny.

"Bugs could never have been at Disneyland because he is a Warner Bros character. Yet we've found a way of getting 36 per cent of our subjects to tell us they shook hands with Bugs.

"There are some methods of interrogation that are unwittingly or even deliberately suggestive. But there are some situations where law enforcement agencies essentially lie to people that they are interviewing. They say things like 'another witness claims to have seen you there' ... some sort of lies that they think will lead to a confession," she said.

Note the bolded part. Sound familiar?


http://www.uhuh.com/control/falsemem.htm

 

[Bob001]

... I once heard Nancy Grace say that she saw no need for defense attorneys at all. ...

It would certainly reduce whatever limited credibility Nancy "Everybody's Guilty" Grace might have if you could find that on video and post it prominently. Even the toughest prosecutors usually recognize the role and importance of defense attorneys, and often join their ranks when they leave government service.