Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[pilot padron]

Sollecito Family trial

That was my guess as well from what I came across, that most trials were three-and-out, but there was a number of cases in which that was not the case, enough to be considered out of the ordinary.

Incidentally, does the above include 'fast track' cases or well, or just the three stage trials? I understand that 'fast track' can also yield an acquittal, but that's even rarer than normal, right? Would it be considered extraordinary, (in murder cases) or does it happen sometimes when the prosecution has a really weak case and the defendant just wants to get it over with?


So a handful of cases in those years that you can recall, perhaps not representative. I wonder just how much the media interest in the case perhaps impacts decisions made by the prosecutors and judges, or if the media naturally follows the cases in which unusual things happen? I see that twice the Supreme Court of Cassation has struck down an acquittal, though it doesn't look like it was for a good cause. Even Mignini thinks they got the wrong guys in the Monster of Florence cases, doesn't he?

Incidentally, do you know what grounds the Court of Cassation used to scuttle the convictions?

What does 'short track' mean in the Cogne case? At first I figured it was just a synonym for 'fast track' but the sequence of events doesn't match.



Here's something else also interesting, this is Pictor's chart that he uploaded to PMF that Rose reposted recently. What does all of this mean for sure? I can puzzle some of it out, and I realize it's only for the Bologna Appeals court from 2001 to 2003 and it appears some of the data is only for six month periods, but I'm curious as to some of the results and what they might mean.

For example, just going by 'figura 15' for the category of 'violenza,' which I take to mean violent crime, it appears for 2001 and the first half of 2002 that 55.35% were modified. Would that be the definition applied to Amanda's case as the sentence was reduced to three years?




That's what I thought, do you foresee the possibility of the calunnia charge being struck down, and what is the status of the other two calunnia charges brought by police and the case against the Sollecitos? Those are tough to get info on!

Dr Sollecito's best lawyers that money can buy succeeded in getting his Family's trial moved closer to his hometown.
This, IMHO, for obvious reasons concerning 'water flows better up Bari's hills than Perugia's'.
Last scheduled date I saw for that one was delayed until 28mar2012.

AFIK, the other two indictments are still active, but no hard info about dates.
Last I saw for Amanda was 15nov2012, but that probably has changed with Judge Hellmann's verdict.
Curt and Edda's was scheduled for 4jul2012, but another source showed it as 24jan2012

 

[Fine]

* * *
There was either a towel on the floor between the shower cubicle and the edge of the bath mat, or Guede merely put the weight of the front of his foot onto the mat as he reached out for a towel (which may have been resting on the edge of the sink). Try it yourself: lay a thick bath mat or rug onto the floor, and step onto it in the same way as the partial print was left on the Perugia bath mat. You'll see that it's extremely easy to make an impression onto the bath mat or rug in exactly the same way as happened on the Perugia bath mat - yet the rear half of the foot can comfortably remain suspended above the floor.

* * *

John,

Well, that's a conceivable scenario but I think there are better ones to explain why no bloody heelprint was discovered on the bathroom floor. I think there was a heelprint left by Rudy. What happened to it? Here's a couple scenarios...

1. Rudy might have placed a towel on the floor in front of the shower stall. See photograph, below, showing the bathmat as found on the afternoon of November 2nd. If Rudy cleaned blood from his (right) trouser leg using the flexible-shaft shower head, the bathmat on the night of November 1st would have had a different orientation. It would have been rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise from the orientation seen in the photograph. After placing the towel on the floor, Rudy then pulled the bathmat toward the shower stall, so that the bathmat was partially on top of the towel. The bathmat "overlapped" the towel. Where Rudy stepped on the bathmat the towel extended beneath the bathmat, leaving most of his footprint on the bathmat but his heelprint on the towel. In which case, the heelprint was left on a towel later found in Meredith's bedroom, but never identified as such.

2. Alternatively, Rudy did leave a bloody heelprint on the bathroom floor but Amanda---the next day---inadvertantly cleaned up the heelprint. How the heck could that happen?

Enter Amanda the afternoon of November 2nd to take a shower. The bathmat rotated 90 degree counter-clockwise from the above photograph, the bloody heelprint somewhere between the shower stall and the bathmat. (And we don't know whether the heelprint---if there was one--- he left on the floor was still contiguous to the bathmat bare footprint when he left the bathroom the night of the murder.) Stepping out of the shower, without a towel, water drips from her feet onto the already diluted bloody heelprint. (She might have even stepped on it.) The heelprint is now doubly diluted, in a pool of water. Amanda now rides the bathmat to her bedroom during her famous bathmat boogie. When she returns---still riding the bathmat---the bathmat rides over that pool of doubly-diluted blood, which is absorbed by the all-cloth bathmat. No identifiable heelprint remains on the floor. Where there had been a heelprint, is now under the bathmat, as the bathmat is positioned in the photograph.This would leave some obscure stains on the underside of the bathmat which were never noticed by the police, or discounted as to their significance.

///

 

[Kaosium]

Dr Sollecito's best lawyers that money can buy succeeded in getting his Family's trial moved closer to his hometown.
This, IMHO, for obvious reasons concerning 'water flows better up Bari's hills than Perugia's'.

Isn't it kinda funny that despite that quote it was the prosecution who tried to make water run uphill? Incidentally, that's how so many of us knew ahead of time that the independent experts would damn the work of Stefanoni. It wasn't because we were 'in' on some kind of conspiracy, it was science and we could cheat and look it up!

Last scheduled date I saw for that one was delayed until 28mar2012.

Ah, thanks! That would be something like four years after the incidents, wouldn't it?

AFIK, the other two indictments are still active, but no hard info about dates.
Last I saw for Amanda was 15nov2012, but that probably has changed with Judge Hellmann's verdict.

That's right, I thought there was something supposedly coming up on that one, you think the date was delayed then?

Curt and Edda's was scheduled for 4jul2012, but another source showed it as 24jan2012

Is that a coincidence? They had a court date scheduled for the Fourth this past year, did it get delayed by a year or is that perhaps conflating those two?

 

[pilot padron]

Just my 'read' on your reply

Isn't it kinda funny that despite that quote it was the prosecution who tried to make water run uphill? Incidentally, that's how so many of us knew ahead of time that the independent experts would damn the work of Stefanoni. It wasn't because we were 'in' on some kind of conspiracy, it was science and we could cheat and look it up!



Ah, thanks! That would be something like four years after the incidents, wouldn't it?



That's right, I thought there was something supposedly coming up on that one, you think the date was delayed then?



Is that a coincidence? They had a court date scheduled for the Fourth this past year, did it get delayed by a year or is that perhaps conflating those two?

Based on what seems to me to be some very 'tongue in cheek' replies and strangely motivated rhetorical questions in your argument.
My well intentioned answer was apparently not received very well by you.

Will try soooo much harder to 'conform' with your implied standards.
*If* in the future, I ever bother answering again

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The other thing is the local editorial I cited about the same time as this poll, the one that said we stand with Mignini, Comodi, the cops, and yes, even Stefi. LOL. The same editorial mentions a plethora of US and Italian intelligence services around for the appeal and doesn't seem to mind a charge of the verdict being the result of political pressure. My position is that this is not only the result of National Pride but also a result of Local Pride. Mignini, Comodi, local cops, even Stefi are heroes, standing strong against political influence and corruption. Go figure.

What seems to be missing in many of the local articles is a discussion of the evidence. Other than the DNA and AK's accusation/calumnia, there is not much specific discussion happening.

RoseMontague,

Can you link back to this editorial? Thanks.

 

[Keeper]

Reviews of Follain's latest in the UK press. Apologies if already posted.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...746/Death-in-Perugia-John-Follain-review.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/27/death-perugia-kercher-follain-review

The second one is dreadful.

 

[Dougm]

The other thing is the local editorial I cited about the same time as this poll, the one that said we stand with Mignini, Comodi, the cops, and yes, even Stefi. LOL. The same editorial mentions a plethora of US and Italian intelligence services around for the appeal and doesn't seem to mind a charge of the verdict being the result of political pressure. My position is that this is not only the result of National Pride but also a result of Local Pride. Mignini, Comodi, local cops, even Stefi are heroes, standing strong against political influence and corruption. Go figure. What seems to be missing in many of the local articles is a discussion of the evidence. Other than the DNA and AK's accusation/calumnia, there is not much specific discussion happening.[/QUOTE]

Interesting post, Rose. I couldn't help but think of the current Penn State situation. Pride, tradition, and denial combine to make people refuse to see a terrible injustice being done, and the perpetrators of the injustice are still seen as heroes, despite clear evidence to the contrary.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mauled over manga

Reviews of Follain's latest in the UK press. Apologies if already posted.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...746/Death-in-Perugia-John-Follain-review.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/27/death-perugia-kercher-follain-review

The second one is dreadful.

Keeper,

At least Mr. Cumming corrected Mr. Follain's ignorance of Facebook. But he also wrote, "We meet Sollecito, Knox’s weed-smoking, violence-fixated boyfriend." Sorry, but many young men his age watch violent movies and semi-violent sports. Perhaps Mr. Follain is responsible for providing Mr. Cumming with false or myopic information, but the characterization is dubious, at best.

 

[Grinder]

The other thing is the local editorial I cited about the same time as this poll, the one that said we stand with Mignini, Comodi, the cops, and yes, even Stefi. LOL. The same editorial mentions a plethora of US and Italian intelligence services around for the appeal and doesn't seem to mind a charge of the verdict being the result of political pressure. My position is that this is not only the result of National Pride but also a result of Local Pride. Mignini, Comodi, local cops, even Stefi are heroes, standing strong against political influence and corruption. Go figure. What seems to be missing in many of the local articles is a discussion of the evidence. Other than the DNA and AK's accusation/calumnia, there is not much specific discussion happening.[/

Interesting post, Rose. I couldn't help but think of the current Penn State situation. Pride, tradition, and denial combine to make people refuse to see a terrible injustice being done, and the perpetrators of the injustice are still seen as heroes, despite clear evidence to the contrary.

I think analyzing the results of the "poll" in question for why people answered as they did would be like doing a psychological profile on a person from the splatter of tomato they had thrown against a wall.

Perhaps the WS Herald should do a poll asking:

1. Did you always think innocence?
2. Did you think innocence only after the first trial?
3. Did you come to innocence during the appeal?
4. Did you shift to innocence only after the Hellman verdict?
5. Do you believe they may be guilty but there wasn't a case made beyond reasonable doubt?
6. After all the new analysis in the appeal do you still actually think they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?
7. Did the WS Herald's reporting influence your decision?
8. Do you believe the Italian Justice system is fair?
9. Did OJ do it?

Only one answer.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Reviews of Follain's latest in the UK press. Apologies if already posted.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...746/Death-in-Perugia-John-Follain-review.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/27/death-perugia-kercher-follain-review

The second one is dreadful.

You sure have that right! Bah. :

As investigators looked more closely at Knox, she emerged as a narcissistic attention-seeker who was sexually adventurous but also jealous of Meredith Kercher's cheerful contentment. Knox knew, it seemed, no boundaries, leaving a vibrator in a transparent washbag and enjoying one-night stands. Detectives thought she was both sly and naive.

[. . . ]

The lead prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, had told the jury "you can't make a black boy pay for everyone", but that is how it now stands: only Guede, raised in Perugia, born in Ivory Coast, remains in prison.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Keeper,

At least Mr. Cumming corrected Mr. Follain's ignorance of Facebook. But he also wrote, "We meet Sollecito, Knox’s weed-smoking, violence-fixated boyfriend." Sorry, but many young men his age watch violent movies and semi-violent sports. Perhaps Mr. Follain is responsible for providing Mr. Cumming with false or myopic information, but the characterization is dubious, at best.

Right. By his standards, my own son might be described as similar. Shameful really.

 

[Osterwelle]

facinating?

Yes, the conclusions you draw from the information that's available of this case are so utterly different than mine, it's facinating. I'm tempting to ask you to bring us Elvis back from your next trip home.

I don't think you're a bad person or something, your brain just seems to work completely different than what I think is normal.

Slightly related: That's one reason why I'm very cautious with "behavioural evidence" like in the AK/RS case. People were knotting the noose because of certain behaviour they thought to be "uncomely" or "strange". But people are different and what they do and how they react in uncommon or extreme situations can be very different to what others would expect. Some even behave "strange" all of the time, but that's how they are.

I can assure you, Machiavelli, some people would put you in the loony bin or at least send you to a shrink for your views are just too alien to them.

the thing I recall is that Hellmann said - his literal words - the prosecutors made no mistakes in this case.
These are Hellmann's word. He added, he would have done exactly the same as they did.
I wonder, what place may this Hellmann's stance take in the innocentisti's mind: does Hellmann too have an inverted view of reality, as he sees Mignini and Comodi as blameless?

In Germany we have a saying: A crow won't peck out another crow's eye (roughly translated). Just because Hellmann made a good decision (IMO) it doesn't mean he's not part of the coterie.
On the other hand, he just might've been throwing them a bone. Let's wait for the motivation report...

-
Osterwelle

 

[Dougm]

Right. By his standards, my own son might be described as similar. Shameful really.

Keeper,

At least Mr. Cumming corrected Mr. Follain's ignorance of Facebook. But he also wrote, "We meet Sollecito, Knox’s weed-smoking, violence-fixated boyfriend." Sorry, but many young men his age watch violent movies and semi-violent sports. Perhaps Mr. Follain is responsible for providing Mr. Cumming with false or myopic information, but the characterization is dubious, at best.

At the time I first started learning about the case, my son and several of his friends were reading the same type of Manga books as Raffaele (except these boys were about a decade younger). To claim that someone is a killer partly based on interest in those books is pure fantasy -- they have become quite popular worldwide. As you said, there are lots of "fantasy" things that boys read that are have violent and sexual stories and images, but most of the people that read them are not violent people any more than those that like boxing or violent movies.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Osterwelle:Slightly related: That's one reason why I'm very cautious with "behavioural evidence" like in the AK/RS case. People were knotting the noose because of certain behaviour they thought to be "uncomely" or "strange". But people are different and what they do and how they react in uncommon or extreme situations can be very different to what others would expect. Some even behave "strange" all of the time, but that's how they are.

I agree fully, and have noticed speculation on pmf as to whether or not Knox may have had lesbian tendencies, or been bisexual (her late dating, class mates assuming she was gay, lack of make-up or frills, etc.). To me , it does not add up. Even if she were a closet lesbian, I do not see why this would give her a proclivity to sexual violence and murder, and I am sure many gay advocates would agree. There seems to be a tendency to want to see Knox as deviant.

 

[smkovalinksy]

At the time I first started learning about the case, my son and several of his friends were reading the same type of Manga books as Raffaele (except these boys were about a decade younger). To claim that someone is a killer partly based on interest in those books is pure fantasy -- they have become quite popular worldwide. As you said, there are lots of "fantasy" things that boys read that are have violent and sexual stories and images, but most of the people that read them are not violent people any more than those that like boxing or violent movies.

Exactly. As a woman, I love to watch Lifetime movies about females who commit crimes (Lifetime network has a multitude of films about a mother who hires a hit man to kill her daughter's rival, an obsessed mistress who kills her lover's wife, a cheerleader who kills another cheerleader, a nanny who kills the family she works for, and on and on.) This is a sort of escape for me ( I admit, not very high brow) and millions of others, and does not indicate that we secretly long to kill.

Same with certain types of pornography (although I do find these distasteful) and things that appeal to young males' tastes. I try to guide my son but am respectful that he is a young male, and I cannot judge him strictly from within my own purview.

Escapism offered by the media ought not brand you as deviant, by any means. I do not think Sollecito is anything but a decent young man who had curiosity and explored his dark side in privacy. As you well note, he did so along with millions of other young males.

 

[Bill Williams]

That's one reason why I'm very cautious with "behavioural evidence" like in the AK/RS case. People were knotting the noose because of certain behaviour they thought to be "uncomely" or "strange". But people are different and what they do and how they react in uncommon or extreme situations can be very different to what others would expect. Some even behave "strange" all of the time, but that's how they are.
-
Osterwelle

In 20-20 hindsight, and there's no way she could have known, AK made mistakes of behaviour which cost her. You are correct, they should not have cost her, but in the cold tabloid world they did. She could not catch a break.

For Giobbi - she cried, said "Ooopla" with her paper shoes on while swivling her hips, and ate pizza with Raffaele. Therefore she's guilty.

She was comforted by Raffaele at the crime scene, caught on camera with a kiss - therefore she's guilty.

She goes through the typical stages of grief, one of which is anger, so when friends ask how MK died, Amanda blurts out angrily, "she ***** bled to death," - an obviously callous behaviour which proves her guilt.

She does a yoga move at the police station, which probably wasn't a cartwheel, but perhaps was - so she's guilty.

She is tricked into admitting to her sexual partners because she's told she has HIV, and that info is released to the public - so she's guilty.

She writes a prison diary, which is also released to the public, some of whom deem it not to have enough about Meredith in it - so she's guilty.

She has various demeanors in the courtroom, sometimes is happy, sometimes moody, does not mention MK enough - therefore she's guilty.

When she makes her Oct 2011 plea in the second trial, she mentions her own suffering of the past four years, and only mentions the tragedy inflicted upon Meredith twice - so she's guilty.

Rather than cackling in glee at getting away with murder like guilters fear she might do, she actually is overwhelmed and bursts into tears at her acquital, thereby convincing guilters that "it's all about her" - therefore she's guilty.

In Seattle, she dresses for Hallowe'en as a Seattle Sounders' soccer supporter with a French mustache, but is savaged for having the gall to dress up as a cat burglar on the day before the anniversay of MK's murder, showing disrespect - so she must be guilty. Perhaps dressing as a soccer player on the actual anniversary would be ok?

This poor woman cannot catch a break from some people. If she were to walk on water, they'd say, "Look at her, she can't even swim!"

Yup, she made mistakes which cost her....

 

[Dougm]

Exactly. As a woman, I love to watch Lifetime movies about females who commit crimes (Lifetime network has a multitude of films about a mother who hires a hit man to kill her daughter's rival, an obsessed mistress who kills her lover's wife, a cheerleader who kills another cheerleader, a nanny who kills the family she works for, and on and on.) This is a sort of escape for me ( I admit, not very high brow) and millions of others, and does not indicate that we secretly long to kill.

Same with certain types of pornography (although I do find these distasteful) and things that appeal to young males' tastes. I try to guide my son but am respectful that he is a young male, and I cannot judge him strictly from within my own purview.

Escapism offered by the media ought not brand you as deviant, by any means. I do not think Sollecito is anything but a decent young man who had curiosity and explored his dark side in privacy. As you well note, he did so along with millions of other young males.

It is one of the most ridiculous things about this case -- the pro-guilt forces took things that millions of teens were doing at the same time, in Perugia and elsewhere, and decided they indicated some sort of deviant behavior. This is an illogical conclusion, when lots of others were doing the same things, and they are not killers. It's what happens when you decide people are guilty without evidence, then look for the evidence later.

 

[smkovalinksy]

In 20-20 hindsight, and there's no way she could have known, AK made mistakes of behaviour which cost her. You are correct, they should not have cost her, but in the cold tabloid world they did. She could not catch a break.

For Giobbi - she cried, said "Ooopla" with her paper shoes on while swivling her hips, and ate pizza with Raffaele. Therefore she's guilty.

She was comforted by Raffaele at the crime scene, caught on camera with a kiss - therefore she's guilty.

She goes through the typical stages of grief, one of which is anger, so when friends ask how MK died, Amanda blurts out angrily, "she ***** bled to death," - an obviously callous behaviour which proves her guilt.

She does a yoga move at the police station, which probably wasn't a cartwheel, but perhaps was - so she's guilty.

She is tricked into admitting to her sexual partners because she's told she has HIV, and that info is released to the public - so she's guilty.

She writes a prison diary, which is also released to the public, some of whom deem it not to have enough about Meredith in it - so she's guilty.

She has various demeanors in the courtroom, sometimes is happy, sometimes moody, does not mention MK enough - therefore she's guilty.

When she makes her Oct 2011 plea in the second trial, she mentions her own suffering of the past four years, and only mention the tragedy inflicted upon Meredith twice - so she's guilty.

Rather than cackling in glee at getting away with murder like guilters claim she might do, she actually is overwhelmed and bursts into tears at her acquital, thereby convincing guilters that "it's all about her" - therefore she's guilty.

In Seattle, she dresses for Hallowe'en as a Seattle Sounders' soccer supporter with a French mustache, but is savaged for having the gall to dress up as a cat burglar on the day before the anniversay of MK's murder, showing disrespect - so she must be guilty.

This poor woman cannot catch a break from some people. If she were to walk on water, they'd say, "Look at her, she can't even swim!"

Yup, she made mistakes which cost her....

Yep, you have summed it up well. God forbid that any of us should ever come under such scrutiny. There are a couple of times that I did come under scrutiny (not relating to crime, but having to explain myself in family therapy situations) and even in this mild situation I felt that I might be misinterpreted and was very unnerved. I can scarcely imagine what Knox had to endure.

 

[davefoc]

Yes, the conclusions you draw from the information that's available of this case are so utterly different than mine, it's facinating. I'm tempting to ask you to bring us Elvis back from your next trip home.

I don't think you're a bad person or something, your brain just seems to work completely different than what I think is normal.

Slightly related: That's one reason why I'm very cautious with "behavioural evidence" like in the AK/RS case. People were knotting the noose because of certain behaviour they thought to be "uncomely" or "strange". But people are different and what they do and how they react in uncommon or extreme situations can be very different to what others would expect. Some even behave "strange" all of the time, but that's how they are.

I can assure you, Machiavelli, some people would put you in the loony bin or at least send you to a shrink for your views are just too alien to them.


In Germany we have a saying: A crow won't peck out another crow's eye (roughly translated). Just because Hellmann made a good decision (IMO) it doesn't mean he's not part of the coterie.
On the other hand, he just might've been throwing them a bone. Let's wait for the motivation report...

-
Osterwelle

FWIW, I think you went too far Osterwelle. I think Machiavelli's posts suggest somebody that is well within the normal range. All people's ideas (including those of skeptics that have thought about this issue a bit) are formed with significant weight from their biases. Confirmation bias, group bias and self interest biases are very powerful and I suspect are often the dominant factor in people's belief structures.

Where Machiavelli's posts are perhaps a little bit outside the norm is that he is more skillful, persistent and knowledgeable than most in defending his belief structure. I think the nature of Machiavelli's posts are very similar to what one would expect to see coming from political partisans in a debate. Their purpose is to convince you that the other side is wrong and/or evil and they never concede a point or stipulate to anything that they see as contrary to the case they are trying to make. They might be a little outside the norm by your standards (and mine) but their arguments find ready acceptance by partisans looking to hear arguments that their side is right and the other side is evil or stupid.

I would add that, for people like me that judge the credibility of somebody by their willingness to admit to facts that aren't supportive of the case they argue, Machiavelli is not as effective at making his case as he might be because of his practice of never conceding a point or admitting to being wrong. But even Machiavelli has occasionally conceded something. I believe he stipulated to the fact that it is likely that AK was hit during her interrogation. But overall his reluctance to ever admit to a change of mind or to concede in the slightest that he has been wrong or to concede a point not in favor of the case he is making reduces his credibility as an advocate of a position to me but I am not so sure that his approach isn't the most successful one if addressed to a general audience.

 

[Rolfe]

It is one of the most ridiculous things about this case -- the pro-guilt forces took things that millions of teens were doing at the same time, in Perugia and elsewhere, and decided they indicated some sort of deviant behavior. This is an illogical conclusion, when lots of others were doing the same things, and they are not killers. It's what happens when you decide people are guilty without evidence, then look for the evidence later.

They look at things Meredith was doing, but in Amanda these same things are signs of guilt.

Rolfe.