Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[TruthCalls]

Do you think perhaps Hellmann upped the calumnia sentencing to 3 years:

1. to "look tough" and to give a nod to Italy, in the face of the pending acquittals
2. because he knew she could appeal and win in the face of the acquittals, and the strongly worded language of these crimes were not committed, these are not facts etc.

The other day someone posted a theory that Hellmann upheld the calunnia charge to allow Massei to save some face and to help temper the response to the acquittal on the other charges. I thought that made sense. So I guess #2 above. Then again, maybe he just thought her guilty.

 

[smkovalinksy]

The other day someone posted a theory that Hellmann upheld the calunnia charge to allow Massei to save some face and to help temper the response to the acquittal on the other charges. I thought that made sense. So I guess #2 above. Then again, maybe he just thought her guilty.

Yes. Perhaps. But I imagine some allowing Massei to save face played in. I wonder if she will appeal, or just let it go, and move on. I think I would want to move on, in her position. Although if there is a good chance of appealing and winning, it might be worth it; guess her attorneys will take all well under advisement.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Not to say that you are not entitled to that opinion, because you certainly are. I think you are misinterpreting my post just a bit.

I never said that AK and RS killing Meredith is impossible, simply because of the type of people they are. I don't know them personally. What I said was that the scenario, given all the facts we know about their past habits, the actual situation, and the facts as we know them, is extraordinarily unlikely.

The type of people they are is not proof they did not do it, the lack of evidence is. And given how unlikely the various theories are to have happened, there needs to be real evidence in order for us to believe that such an unlikely scenario occured.

Although a motive is not absolutely necessary if we had hard proof, in the absence of such proof, the question of "why in the world would they have done this?" is a valid one.

I understand what you are saying as well. Although the lack of evidence must be granted the supremacy regarding the acquittals, it is natural regarding human affairs to consider motive, likelihood of committing the act, etc.

This is why "motive and opportunity" weigh in so often with murder charges. And if , say, a wife turns up dead, the lack or presence of a huge life insurance policy with husband as beneficiary certainly is taken under consideration.

Additionally, character and character witnesses are taken seriously in court. So your stance is sound.

 

[smkovalinksy]

@ Dougm:
In addition to the above, and in relation to it:

I have seen much discussion - on the part of a few posters - on pmf regarding Amanda being possibly lesbian. Her late dating, her history of being a tomboy and her father's "son" (see Nina Burleigh text), her relationship with Madison Paxton, her lack of makeup and simple dress are all cited.

So this is the flip side of examining character and likelihood, as well as evidence. I think their theory is: She identified with males, may have shared in Sollecito's paraphelia, and subsequently on an unconscious level, had an interest in a sexual attack on Kercher. One this ideation was activated, murder became a real possibility.

It is a seductive theory, psychologically, for those who presume guilt. One can look at Karla Homolka and various other females to back this up, and from such a purview, it becomes not only possible but highly probable that Knox was involved. I am trying to reveal the mechanism of such thinking. I was bought into this seductive theory, until enlightenment regarding the facts made a clean sweep of it.

The thirst for Bernardo to share his rapist activities with his lover Homolka increased. On June 15, 1991 Bernardo kidnapped Leslie Mahaffy and brought her to the couple's home. Bernardo and Homolka repeatedly raped Mahaffy over a course of several days, videotaping many of the assaults. They eventually killed Mahaffy and cut her body into pieces, encased the pieces in cement, and threw the cement in a lake. On June 29 Mahaffy's remains were found by a couple canoeing on the lake.

http://crime.about.com/od/murder/p/homolka.htm

 

[Didaktylos]

The other day someone posted a theory that Hellmann upheld the calunnia charge to allow Massei to save some face and to help temper the response to the acquittal on the other charges. I thought that made sense. So I guess #2 above. Then again, maybe he just thought her guilty.

Is it a totally off-the-wall theory to speculate that Massei (and possibly his fellow stipendiary judge) might have personally favoured acquittal at first instance but were outvoted by the lay members of the panel, the dog's breakfast of the Motivations Report being his way of registering dissent (i.e. by giving plenty of scope for the defense for the appeal round). It will be interesting to see what the Hellmann Report says about the confirmation of calumnia conviction.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Is it a totally off-the-wall theory to speculate that Massei (and possibly his fellow stipendiary judge) might have personally favoured acquittal at first instance but were outvoted by the lay members of the panel, the dog's breakfast of the Motivations Report being his way of registering dissent (i.e. by giving plenty of scope for the defense for the appeal round). It will be interesting to see what the Hellmann Report says about the confirmation of calumnia conviction.

No. It makes a great deal of sense. And yes, it will.

 

[Bill Williams]

Since I am banned at TJMK site, and someone has made an intelligent post, which I cannot respond to over there, I'll respond to it here and on the IIP site, in the vain hope they see it.

I list some things I reseached about burglaries which your technician friend may like to comment on.

1) The burglar would almost certainly have knocked at the door with a pretentious excuse to see if anyone was at the house.
2) They would not go ‘tooled up’ with a knife. Very serious offence, armed robbery
3) You take a large screwdriver. Handy for using as a ‘jemmy’ for locked drawers, wardrobes, boxes etc. It can be used as a weapon if need be.
Choose your entrance. Once you have accessed a room by a broken window.
4) You block the incoming door.
5) At night you would draw the curtains so that you could turn on the light. (This means that the windows and inner shutters in Filomenas room should be CLOSED and not open as the photographic evidence show).
6) Look for a sportsbag, rucksack or hold-all. Failing that a suitcase, bin bags, boxes, carrier bags.
7) ‘Jemmy’ locked furniture,
8) Bag all immediate valuable items
9) Ransack rest of room
10) Take bag(s) and leave room. Go straight to the front door. Check that you can open it from the inside for your exit. Bolt or latch it. You do not want anyone coming in. Leave the bags at the front door for your exit.
11) Survey the rest of the property.

None of these points seem to have applied to this burglary.

Quite true. Am I supposed to dispute this?

However, brace yourself, there are such things a differing M.O.'s.

In fact, some of those things could have happened - he could have had a screwdriver, could have knocked on the door, was more than likely interrupted in doing some of those "defensive measures" by MK's sudden presence, or he thought he was going to do a dash and grab with the rent money. For that matter, I never understood why the lack of stuff taken from FR's room is at all determinative here.

RG was after the rent money, and opportunistically took phones and stuff from MK's purse in a panic after the murder. He then fled the country - the only one who did do, and THIS IS FAR MORE DETERMINATIVE A CLUE TO HIS GUILT AND EVERYONE ELSE'S INNOCENCE THAT ANYTHING!

Is this the way these debates go? I describe a pitcher who is left handed and you reply, "No, pitchers are mainly right handed, so your guy couldn't have been left handed!"

Of course there are more than one M.O. depending on the opportunistic goals of the thief.

What does your post prove? That RG violated some code of burglar ethics?

Besides, you misspelled "researched" above. P.Q. bans people for misspellings. I had to learn that the hard way. I wish you better luck.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Since I am banned at TJMK site, and someone has made an intelligent post, which I cannot respond to over there, I'll respond to it here and on the IIP site, in the vain hope they see it.


Quite true. Am I supposed to dispute this?

However, brace yourself, there are such things a differing M.O.'s.

In fact, some of those things could have happened - he could have had a screwdriver, could have knocked on the door, was more than likely interrupted in doing some of those "defensive measures" by MK's sudden presence, or he thought he was going to do a dash and grab with the rent money. For that matter, I never understood why the lack of stuff taken from FR's room is at all determinative here.

RG was after the rent money, and opportunistically took phones and stuff from MK's purse in a panic after the murder. He then fled the country - the only one who did do, and THIS IS FAR MORE DETERMINATIVE A CLUE TO HIS GUILT AND EVERYONE ELSE'S INNOCENCE THAT ANYTHING!

Is this the way these debates go? I describe a pitcher who is left handed and you reply, "No, pitchers are mainly right handed, so your guy couldn't have been left handed!"

Of course there are more than one M.O. depending on the opportunistic goals of the thief.

What does your post prove? That RG violated some code of burglar ethics?

Besides, you misspelled "researched" above. P.Q. bans people for misspellings. I had to learn that the hard way. I wish you better luck.

Good post. I agree with your stance. Sorry to hear PQ banned you, and bans people for spelling errors, which are often typos or people writing faster than they are thinking.

 

[Dougm]

@ Dougm:
In addition to the above, and in relation to it:

I have seen much discussion - on the part of a few posters - on pmf regarding Amanda being possibly lesbian. Her late dating, her history of being a tomboy and her father's "son" (see Nina Burleigh text), her relationship with Madison Paxton, her lack of makeup and simple dress are all cited.

So this is the flip side of examining character and likelihood, as well as evidence. I think their theory is: She identified with males, may have shared in Sollecito's paraphelia, and subsequently on an unconscious level, had an interest in a sexual attack on Kercher. One this ideation was activated, murder became a real possibility.

It is a seductive theory, psychologically, for those who presume guilt. One can look at Karla Homolka and various other females to back this up, and from such a purview, it becomes not only possible but highly probable that Knox was involved. I am trying to reveal the mechanism of such thinking. I was bought into this seductive theory, until enlightenment regarding the facts made a clean sweep of it.

The thirst for Bernardo to share his rapist activities with his lover Homolka increased. On June 15, 1991 Bernardo kidnapped Leslie Mahaffy and brought her to the couple's home. Bernardo and Homolka repeatedly raped Mahaffy over a course of several days, videotaping many of the assaults. They eventually killed Mahaffy and cut her body into pieces, encased the pieces in cement, and threw the cement in a lake. On June 29 Mahaffy's remains were found by a couple canoeing on the lake.

http://crime.about.com/od/murder/p/homolka.htm

This is the problem with all the PG theories that I have seen, as well as the conviction in the court of first instance. They are all based on what "could be" true, instead of what the facts bear out.

For example, yes it is easy to be led down the "Amanda might be a lesbian" path if one chooses to, using the facts you mentioned. However, lots of girls start to date "late" (many are not sure how to go about this in high school), and lots wear little makeup, and participate in sports. It no more makes those girls lesbian than does wearing a certain color, or type of clothing. And the same people want to make Amanda out to be "sex obsessed" because they feel she hooked up with men too frequently!

If one would like to find a rationale for Amanda participating in the killing, because the real facts don't provide one, they can put these facts together and try to find something. But the assumptions are bogus. And they are countered by real, clear, evidence to the contrary. The friends who knew Amanda in Seattle roll their eyes at these theories.

 

[smkovalinksy]

This is the problem with all the PG theories that I have seen, as well as the conviction in the court of first instance. They are all based on what "could be" true, instead of what the facts bear out.

For example, yes it is easy to be led down the "Amanda might be a lesbian" path if one chooses to, using the facts you mentioned. However, lots of girls start to date "late" (many are not sure how to go about this in high school), and lots wear little makeup, and participate in sports. It no more makes those girls lesbian than does wearing a certain color, or type of clothing. And the same people want to make Amanda out to be "sex obsessed" because they feel she hooked up with men too frequently!

If one would like to find a rationale for Amanda participating in the killing, because the real facts don't provide one, they can put these facts together and try to find something. But the assumptions are bogus. And they are countered by real, clear, evidence to contrary. The friends who knew Amanda in Seattle roll their eyes at these theories.

Exactly. This is why facts and empirical evidence must be granted supremacy over theories, but they cannot seem to grasp this on PMF. In the case of Karla Homoloka, the facts did NOT point away from guilt and thus upheld suspicions about her character. And yes, with PG people, Amanda is damned if she does, damned if she doesn't: She is both a suspected lesbian and a girl who hooks up with too many men.

 

[RWVBWL]

Wind effect...

Since I am banned at TJMK site, and someone has made an intelligent post, which I cannot respond to over there, I'll respond to it here and on the IIP site, in the vain hope they see it.

I list some things I reseached about burglaries which your technician friend may like to comment on.

1) The burglar would almost certainly have knocked at the door with a pretentious excuse to see if anyone was at the house.
2) They would not go ‘tooled up’ with a knife. Very serious offence, armed robbery
3) You take a large screwdriver. Handy for using as a ‘jemmy’ for locked drawers, wardrobes, boxes etc. It can be used as a weapon if need be.
Choose your entrance. Once you have accessed a room by a broken window.
4) You block the incoming door.
5) At night you would draw the curtains so that you could turn on the light. (This means that the windows and inner shutters in Filomenas room should be CLOSED and not open as the photographic evidence show). 6) Look for a sportsbag, rucksack or hold-all. Failing that a suitcase, bin bags, boxes, carrier bags.
7) ‘Jemmy’ locked furniture,
8) Bag all immediate valuable items
9) Ransack rest of room
10) Take bag(s) and leave room. Go straight to the front door. Check that you can open it from the inside for your exit. Bolt or latch it. You do not want anyone coming in. Leave the bags at the front door for your exit.
11) Survey the rest of the property.

None of these points seem to have applied to this burglary.

<snip>

Greetings Bill Williams,
I would like to comment on the quote that you posted above, since starsdad does not seem to be taking some known facts into consideration.

From a lot of reading about this case, I know that it was pretty windy that night that Meredith was brutally slain. This wind surely had to have had an effect on a front door that would not stay closed and a bedroom window shutter, (possibly closed after the break-in occurred), which had its own window broken.

Per Frank Sfarzo of Perugia Shock, in a post titled 'The Secret of The Door':
"The front door, if not locked, opens by itself with the wind. It was a very windy night"

According to Machiavelli, in an old post from Dec. 2010, he writes this:
"On November 1. and 2. 2007 the winds in Perugia had an average might of 22-22.4 kmph (13.5 mph)."

Link:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6614033#post6614033

That is a pretty breezy night. I know, I often use a Davis Wind Scribe for research purposes to measure the wind.

In my humble opinion, the front door, which was probably closed but not locked when Rudy Guede left, eventually opened completely. The wind draft went thru the house, and along with the much stronger wind gusts outside, then helped to open the shutters to Filomena bedroom, if Rudy Guede had indeed closed them when he 1st came inside. Make possible sense?

Feel free to offer up a different theory...
RW

 

[Dougm]

Exactly. This is why facts and empirical evidence must be granted supremacy over theories, but they cannot seem to grasp this on PMF. In the case of Karla Homoloka, the facts did NOT point away from guilt and thus upheld suspicions about her character. And yes, with PG people, Amanda is damned if she does, damned if she doesn't: She is both a suspected lesbian and a girl who hooks up with too many men.

The comparisons with Karla Homolka are strange anyway. Her husband had a history of violent acts, and there was ample evidence of the couple's wrongdoing. If, as in the case of Holmolka, we had video tapes of the crimes being committed, there would never have been any disagreement on this case!

 

[smkovalinksy]

The comparisons with Karla Homolka are strange anyway. Her husband had a history of violent acts, and there was ample evidence of the couple's wrongdoing. If, as in the case of Holmolka, we had video tapes of the crimes being committed, there would never have been any disagreement on this case!

True. The only reason I brought her up is because someone once kept throwing her at me on websleuths forum, when I tried to assert the unlikelihood of Knox wanting participation in a sexual crime. "But look at Karla Homolka, how nice and ordinary she seemed, blah blah" was the refrain .

 

[Bill Williams]

Greetings Bill Williams,
I would like to comment on the quote that you posted above, since starsdad does not seem to be taking some known facts into consideration.

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

In my humble opinion, the front door, which was probably closed but not locked when Rudy Guede left, eventually opened completely. The wind draft went thru the house, and along with the much stronger wind gusts outside, then helped to open the shutters to Filomena bedroom, if Rudy Guede had indeed closed them when he 1st came inside. Make possible sense?

Feel free to offer up a different theory...
RW

Truly, I am not in a position to comment. Sounds good.... fits with AK finding the door open at 10:30 am on the 2ns of Nov. If the door had been locked, MK's missing keys were probably used to open it from the inside, which I believe was necessary.

One problem, though, is that I am agnostic with Massei's first motivation report that MK's cellphones were taken so that a stray, unanswered call ringing in MK's locked room would not draw immediate suspicion that some peril lay behind the door. Not that you said it, but that's part of this. There has to be an explanation for the call to MK's bank....

But the wind stuff I cannot comment. Sounds good to me!

 

[Grinder]

It wouldn't be armed robbery it would be armed burglary. Rudy had some history of using knives when committing other crimes.

The handling of the burglary would change when Meredith arrived home, if that's how it went.

Clearly the burglary was no longer the game plan after a very short time period. No time to fill suitcases with loot and as someone already pointed out, this wasn't that kind of burglary. He wasn't planning on cleaning out the house as, unless he was with Kokomani, he had no transport.

Basically he had no time to follow the burglar's handbook so he just improvised and killed Meredith.

 

[Freddy]

It wouldn't be armed robbery it would be armed burglary.

The two are not mutually exclusive. If he stole anything from Meredith by force or threat of force then he committed both, as well as rape and murder.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

history and hagiography

I suppose though, that after 4 years, there is not much real discussion to be had. Hence the glorification of Amanda, here and elsewhere, and also from what I've seen, the glorification of Meredith, elsewhere - I haven't been here long enough to know if that happens here at all. To be fair though, Meredith has been made out to be a Saint for quite a long time now and that is not true either.

bookworm,

I am not certain what you mean by glorification. What I have observed is that many false statements about Amanda Knox's character have been circulated for a long time. For example at another site this past week, I saw someone post the falsehood that Amanda had herself photographed behind a machine gun in a holocaust museum (implying anti-Semitism, I infer). A couple of people pointed out that the machine gun was of WWI-vintage and it was actually an Austrian history museum, IIRC. I don't consider Amanda or Raffaele to be saints, but I also think that it is entirely legitimate to rehabilitate their public images, as long as one does so with facts and avoids hagiography. MOO.

 

[Ammonitida]

True. The only reason I brought her up is because someone once kept throwing her at me on websleuths forum, when I tried to assert the unlikelihood of Knox wanting participation in a sexual crime. "But look at Karla Homolka, how nice and ordinary she seemed, blah blah" was the refrain .

The comparison to Karla Homolka is outrageous. She was an abused woman under the total control of Paul Bernardo, her husband -- a man who already had a violent history of sexual assault before they met. She was battered repeatedly by him, had low self esteem and only went bad to please him in order to earn his "love".

Knox, a normal young woman with good self-esteem, had only began dating Sollecito just a few days prior to the murder and there's no evidence to suggest that he was abusive or controlling to her nor is there any evidence that Solleicto had a sexually violent past. Hardly the circumstances that can sometimes create a Karla Homolka. To accept the guilter position to to accept that a woman tried to cover up the sexual assault and murder of another woman for two men she barely knew. There's no ring of truth to that.

I'll say it again, Amanda's gender alone is circumstantial evidence of innocence.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I hope that the poster called "Stilicho" who posts on trainwreck.org is not related to the member called Stilicho we have here. Of course there's no way of knowing whether he/she is or isn't. However, it appears that the Stilicho who posts on trainwreck.org is either lying or stupid.

Why else would he/she post something that is so obviously incorrect?

Stilicho has been attacking the Idaho Innocence Project for a long time now. It's not unusual for Stilicho because he will attack any organization that shows support for Amanda and Raffaele, regardless of the facts.

You have to understand, he's doing it all for Meredith!

 

[bookworm]

bookworm,

I am not certain what you mean by glorification. What I have observed is that many false statements about Amanda Knox's character have been circulated for a long time. For example at another site this past week, I saw someone post the falsehood that Amanda had herself photographed behind a machine gun in a holocaust museum (implying anti-Semitism, I infer). A couple of people pointed out that the machine gun was of WWI-vintage and it was actually an Austrian history museum, IIRC. I don't consider Amanda or Raffaele to be saints, but I also think that it is entirely legitimate to rehabilitate their public images, as long as one does so with facts and avoids hagiography. MOO.

halides, "glorification" was probably a poor choice of words for my description of what is sometimes happening with Amanda. I only used it because I was responding to Moss' post regarding the "beatification project" reference. I only meant to say pretty much what you're saying above in regards to Amanda. People are only trying to counter the lies and misinformation about her with truth and that's probably why it seems to some others that there's a "beatification" campaign going on. I don't believe that's true in any sense. I also don't believe anyone thinks Amanda is perfect. I do believe there's been a "beatification/glorification" project going on in regards to Meredith for a long time. I apologize for choosing a word that gave the wrong impression.