Why so much attention to the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Skeptical Greg]

 

[AnimalFriendly]

I think it's the Curt Knox/Edda Mellas public relations machine.

If interest in the case were independent interest, not driven by the family's paid PR campaign, I think public opinion in America would not be so far on the side of the claims of innocence by AK & RS.

Looking at the information long available in English, like the Mignini report, it's pretty clear that AK & RS were involved in the crime, and that the Italian justice system has not yet declared them innocent, and the final judicial decision from the Italians isn not likely to go the way Knox, Solletico & their very vocal support want.

Actually it is quite likely to "go the way" Knox, Sollecito (note the spelling, please) want. If you think otherwise, you're setting yourself up for a very big disappointment.

 

[Baylor]

it's pretty clear that AK & RS were involved in the crime....

Uh-Oh!

"Thread Drift" is about to take on a whole new meaning. I think some people are no longer interested in coming up with an operational definition for the word whore.

I'm looking forward to reporting these off-topic posts.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The New Face of Evil

The subtitle of Newsweek author Barbie Nadeau's Daily Beast column right after the conviction in 2009 was, "Is the real Amanda Knox the sex-obsessed, cold-blooded murderer that the prosecution depicted? Or worse?" In it she wrote, "When witnesses described her sexual appetites, she easily fit the role...In fact, it seems obvious that the jury saw Amanda Knox as the 'she-devil' the prosecution maintains she is....When the two [Knox and Sollecito] got into the prison van at the end of each hearing, the press had bets on whether or not they got to have sex the whole way back, or whether they just talked dirty to each other through the bars."

Contemporaneously Lawyer Scott Greenfield pointed out, "During the summation, the prosecutor told the jury about the things Amanda Knox might have said to Meredith Kercher before the alleged drug-induced orgy that ended with her throat being slashed.

'You are always behaving like a little saint. Now we will show you. Now we will make you have sex.'

This would be a horrible thing to say, except that it never happened. No one says that such a statement was ever made." Strange that Ms. Nadeau never found the time to point this out. She dished out the narrative that Amanda was sexually voracious and therefore capable of murder, and we lapped it up.

 

[Bill Williams]

I think it's the Curt Knox/Edda Mellas public relations machine.

If interest in the case were independent interest, not driven by the family's paid PR campaign, I think public opinion in America would not be so far on the side of the claims of innocence by AK & RS.

Looking at the information long available in English, like the Mignini report, it's pretty clear that AK & RS were involved in the crime, and that the Italian justice system has not yet declared them innocent, and the final judicial decision from the Italians isn not likely to go the way Knox, Solletico & their very vocal support want.

My continuing interest in this case is dumb posts like this. There is no "Mignini report", the Italian system has declared them innocent or they would not have been released, and public opinion cannot be skewed by a non-existent public relations campaign.

That this stuff keeps circulating uncritically is the only reason to follow this these days.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I think it's the Curt Knox/Edda Mellas public relations machine.

If interest in the case were independent interest, not driven by the family's paid PR campaign, I think public opinion in America would not be so far on the side of the claims of innocence by AK & RS.

If you actually try looking for proper evidence of any such paid PR campaign, you'll find there is none. As far as I can tell it's strictly a figment of the imagination of a small core group of pro-guilt activists, who repeat it as fact often enough that it gets picked up. So that's not a convincing explanation.

(The myth seems to serve the purpose of "explaining" why so many credentialed scientists, informed critical thinkers, at least one former FBI agent and so on are all on the record very clearly as saying that in their professional opinion the case against AK and RS stunk. The myth says that every single one of them has been paid off by a multi-million dollar international public relations effort. It's quite interesting how witch hunts, botched prosecutions and conspiracy theories all seem to grow in the telling until they get incredibly unwieldy).

Looking at the information long available in English, like the Mignini report, it's pretty clear that AK & RS were involved in the crime, and that the Italian justice system has not yet declared them innocent, and the final judicial decision from the Italians isn not likely to go the way Knox, Solletico & their very vocal support want.

We're getting off topic but what's a Mignini report? Is it like the Massei/Christiani report?

On topic, another reason why the story has legs, I imagine, is it has dramatic twists and turns. Whatever the logical holes in the Massei/Christiani report it told an exiting story of sex, drugs and murder. Then the Hellmann report and the conclusions of the expert review of the DNA evidence tore Massei/Christiani to shreds - what a twist! Like in pro wrestling, a big comeback gets the crowd involved whether or not they think the person making the comeback is a good guy.

 

[RandyN]

I think it's the Curt Knox/Edda Mellas public relations machine.

If interest in the case were independent interest, not driven by the family's paid PR campaign, I think public opinion in America would not be so far on the side of the claims of innocence by AK & RS.

Looking at the information long available in English, like the Mignini report, it's pretty clear that AK & RS were involved in the crime, and that the Italian justice system has not yet declared them innocent, and the final judicial decision from the Italians isn not likely to go the way Knox, Solletico & their very vocal support want.

Maybe you are not aware but there is a whole other section that is devoted to the actual case. Your post is off topic.

Don't feel bad...the poster UR thinks the OP here wanted to discuss if AK is a whore and if her parents feel bad about that. S(he) has been wrong about that in almost every post and despite Mod warnings has barely moved past that original idea.

Others like Coulsdon suggest no position but allude that some sort of connection amongst supporters seems odd...not lead... but what? A Grand Conspiracy? And UR found that interesting. But they remain posting here and off topic and not in CT where they belong so...

I think we are seeing...although in a condensed form..why this case became so popular here on JREF. And it is true...a few old posters that were moderated out have returned now to take a few parting shots at the wrongly accused. Not all...

But your off topic post is exactly why the subject remained so popular. And were it in the correct area (the Knox thread) it would be revealed for the illogical, fact-less, and baseless trash it is. But its not...so it wont.

 

[Trish Randall]

My continuing interest in this case is dumb posts like this. There is no "Mignini report", the Italian system has declared them innocent or they would not have been released, and public opinion cannot be skewed by a non-existent public relations campaign.

That this stuff keeps circulating uncritically is the only reason to follow this these days.

Sorry, I meant the Massai report has long been available in English.

 

[Trish Randall]

Sorry, I didn't know there is another thread on this. I thought I was replying to the question.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Sorry, I didn't know there is another thread on this. I thought I was replying to the question.

No dramas.

Discussion of the case itself goes in the other thread.

This one is specifically about the sub-topic of why the case gets so much attention, or for that matter whether it does get more attention than the Norfolk Four or the Satanic Panic cases or similar miscarriages of justice.

For what it's worth I thought your post was perfectly on-topic for this thread. I thought it had a mistaken factual assumption embedded in it (that there was a multi-million dollar PR machine working for the Knox family) but that in no way makes it off-topic.

 

[Trish Randall]

Kevin Lowe,

Thanks.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply a multi-million dollar PR campaign, I meant the family, and some lawyers & writers who speak on their behalf to the American media.

 

[Baylor]

Don't feel bad...the poster UR thinks the OP here wanted to discuss if AK is a whore and if her parents feel bad about that. S(he) has been wrong about that in almost every post and despite Mod warnings has barely moved past that original idea.

Off-topic Sylvia Brown psychic nonsense reported.

Others like Coulsdon suggest no position but allude that some sort of connection amongst supporters seems odd...not lead... but what? A Grand Conspiracy? And UR found that interesting..

Interesting indeed. The way people reinforce each others' behavior in cyberspace is a new phenomenom. It's not well understood but clearly in this thread there's been people who share similiar attitudes and feelings of Amanda Knox--feelings that seemingly formed online. Similiar to pack behavior in real life, people tend to strengthen bonds by reinforcing those in the "in-group" and ridiculing those in the "out-group" - Exactly the type of behavior we see in this very thread. We saw very similiar behavior in the 9/11 CT subforum and ,indeed, this new way to form bonds with people is responsible for the formation of the 9/11 "truth" movement. "Truthers" strengthened their bonds and beliefs by ridiculing "debunkers" and "shills".

These antagonisms between the pro/anti-knoxers and the 9/11 truthers/debunkers are like a modern day Robber's Cave Experiment. As behaviors like these get more thoroughly studied, we'll have another way to explain, control, and predict behavior.

I think we are seeing...although in a condensed form..why this case became so popular here on JREF. And it is true...a few old posters that were moderated out have returned now to take a few parting shots at the wrongly accused. Not all...

Who are these "old posters that were moderated out have returned now to take a few parting shots at the wrongly accused?"

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Interesting indeed. The way people reinforce each others' behavior in cyberspace is a new phenomenom. It's not well understood but clearly in this thread there's been people who share similiar attitudes and feelings of Amanda Knox--feelings that seemingly formed online. Similiar to pack behavior in real life, people tend to strengthen bonds by reinforcing those in the "in-group" and ridiculing those in the "out-group" - Exactly the type of behavior we see in this very thread. We saw very similiar behavior in the 9/11 CT subforum and ,indeed, this new way to form bonds with people is responsible for the formation of the 9/11 "truth" movement. "Truthers" strengthened their bonds and beliefs by ridiculing "debunkers" and "shills".

These antagonisms between the pro/anti-knoxers and the 9/11 truthers/debunkers are like a modern day Robber's Cave Experiment. As behaviors like these get more thoroughly studied, we'll have another way to explain, control, and predict behavior.

If you think there's in-group behaviour in the JREF forum discussion of the case, you'll fall off your chair if you take a look and the perugiamurderfile sites (.org and .net). It's a thoroughly protected echo chamber where the faithful egg each other on to increasingly crazy beliefs and behaviours, now utterly divorced from reality. (This is very much like the Loose Change forums for the 9/11 "Truthers").

I think this also explains the persistence of public activism about the case. The pro-guilt side only expose themselves briefly to the outside community, and they can retreat to their echo chamber to renew their faith afterwards and brush up on the latest talking points.

On public forums like JREF or lesswrong where they have to defend their views against fact-checking and critical thinking the pro-guilt side tend to wilt in the sunlight fairly quickly, so without sheltered spaces for their narrative to spread unopposed I think they'd have died out by now.

 

[Antony]

I think it's the Curt Knox/Edda Mellas public relations machine.

If interest in the case were independent interest, not driven by the family's paid PR campaign, I think public opinion in America would not be so far on the side of the claims of innocence by AK & RS.

Looking at the information long available in English, like the Mignini report, it's pretty clear that AK & RS were involved in the crime, and that the Italian justice system has not yet declared them innocent, and the final judicial decision from the Italians isn not likely to go the way Knox, Solletico & their very vocal support want.

I haven't heard of the "Mignini report" until now; but if it's some kind of self-justification from the prime architect of the shambles this case has become, then it might account for the kind of attitudes still sometimes visible in responses to it.

As for the "Knox/Mellas PR machine", the idea that a single family is able to manipulate opinions across the world above the workings of the Italian judicial administration, is one of the more comical ideas bandied around in this controversy.

ETA: Now seen this was a reference to the Massei report. Still seems a bit of a Freudian slip that illustrates who really controlled the initial trial.

 

[Trish Randall]

Sorry, Anthony, I meant the Massei report. (which I did read, but it's been over a year)

Knox & Mellas have a group of writers & lawyers who speak out on their behalf, such as Bruce Fischer (who discusses on the web "the grassroots organization that helped free Amanda Knox), Ann Bremner, who appeared on TV supporting Amanda's position and Judge Michael Heavy, who was censured for advocating for her as part of "Friends of Amanda".

I have to say one thing, which is the thing that initially made me suspicious of Amanda Knox - why blame an innocent man, Patrick Lumumba, landing an innocent man in jail, driving his establishment out of business & basically ruining his life? (her conviction for that slander was upheld)

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Sorry, Anthony, I meant the Massei report.

Knox & Mellas have a group of writers & lawyers who speak out on their behalf, such as Bruce Fischer (who discusses on the web "the grassroots organization that helped free Amanda Knox), Ann Bremner, who appeared on TV supporting Amanda's position and Judge Michael Heavy, who was censured for advocating for her as part of "Friends of Amanda".

I have to say one thing, which is the thing that initially made me suspicious of Amanda Knox - why blame an innocent man, Patrick Lumumba, landing an innocent man in jail, driving his establishment out of business & basically ruining his life? (her conviction for that slander was upheld)

We're getting into territory best moved to the other thread.

It's going to turn out that it's actually a well-known and well-established fact about human psychology that under the right circumstances you can get people to "remember" all sorts of false things. The Norfolk Four confessing to a murder they didn't commit is a famous example. The police used a now-discredited interviewing technique where you convince the subject that they are repressing memories of what happened because of trauma, and encourage them to "remember" (imagine) the narrative the police need.

See you over there for the details.

 

[RoseMontague]

Returning to the OP, what started this off was the original cartwheel thread and a post by Skeptic Ginger that implied innocence. A few of the "real" skeptics came along and disagreed. Word about the discussion got out and before long the thread had attracted many of those with more than a passing interest in the case like Bruce Fisher and Fulcanelli.

For me, it was the mystery involved in the case, a lot of it just did not add up. I was leaning towards guilt based on what I had access to at the time, which was primarily "news" reports including quite a bit from the tabloid press, much of which came out of the English press. As the real evidence came out and not the many falsehoods promoted by the press, the case for innocence got stronger. The Massei Report remains today, for me, still the number one document that shows that AK and RS are innocent of any involvement in the crime. If anyone wants to discuss that evidence, there is a thread for it.

For the JREF, it was a great example of skepticism at work. As real evidence, documents, pictures, and videos came out the more posters began to see the case for innocence was strong and the debate with those that believed in guilt became more contentious.

 

[anglolawyer]

I've never really got involved with these threads, but I have taken some interest in the case. I happened to hear part of a reading of a book about the case on the radio and I found myself drawn in by both the compelling nature of the characters and the circumstances. Rudy Guede's backstory I found particularly fascinating. And Amanda Knox seemed to have a different and more interesting personality than I would have expected. It's a better and far less simplistic story than the last John Grisham novel I read and since it's real, a happy ending delivers a much more satisfying punch.

Also, in general, I find stories of dramatic questionable convictions and media distortions followed by battles for justice interesting. I watched all of the WM3 films and read Damien Echols' book. I'm sure there are tons of interesting similar stories of false convictions and such that are barely discussed. But if they do not draw significant media attention then it can be hard to learn a whole lot about them on a casual basis.

I didn't get involved in the threads, because the 1000s of previous unread posts just made the prospect unattractive. Plus when I glanced inside I couldn't really follow what people were talking about. I wasn't interested enough to want to learn every detail of the evidence with either AK or WM3.

Good post which attracted no reply despite being both interesting and on topic. You highlight something that makes the case stand out from the run-of-the-mill, senseless murder - it's a whodunnit. It has circumstances that draw one in. Depending on your POV, they either gave themselves away or attracted unjustified suspicion after the crime. The thread for that is, as you say, not for the casual reader.

What got my interest was the amount of raw material available online and what sustains it now, TBH, is the battle (now turning into a rout) with the pro-guilt crowd. That, plus the fact the case is not over and there remain some appeals to be heard in March (and maybe further proceedings after that of one kind or another).

 

[Bill Williams]

Sorry, Anthony, I meant the Massei report. (which I did read, but it's been over a year)

Knox & Mellas have a group of writers & lawyers who speak out on their behalf, such as Bruce Fischer (who discusses on the web "the grassroots organization that helped free Amanda Knox), Ann Bremner, who appeared on TV supporting Amanda's position and Judge Michael Heavy, who was censured for advocating for her as part of "Friends of Amanda".

I have to say one thing, which is the thing that initially made me suspicious of Amanda Knox - why blame an innocent man, Patrick Lumumba, landing an innocent man in jail, driving his establishment out of business & basically ruining his life? (her conviction for that slander was upheld)

Apologies for snapping at you.

Did you know that it was Judge Heavey who turned himself in on the point you raise?

You may also wish to read the Hellmann motivation's report, from the court which acquitted the pair. Hellmann covers those point.

And as for Bruce Fisher being part of a grassroots organization, that is true. But it is a far, far cry from what is claimed as a $1 million PR campaign. It is a systematic look at evidence. There are other "grassroot campaigns" to spread misinformation, usually citing liberally from the now debunked prosecution case.

Have you read the four things that even Judge Massei admits are facts about the students, which tend to suggest they didn't do anything? I can repost or send private PM if need be.

 

[Antony]

Sorry, Anthony, I meant the Massei report. (which I did read, but it's been over a year)

From what I understand, it might as well be known as "the Mignini report".

Knox & Mellas have a group of writers & lawyers who speak out on their behalf, such as Bruce Fischer (who discusses on the web "the grassroots organization that helped free Amanda Knox), Ann Bremner, who appeared on TV supporting Amanda's position and Judge Michael Heavy, who was censured for advocating for her as part of "Friends of Amanda".

... and your conclusion is that they are being paid by the alleged Amanda Knox PR campaign? Might it not just be that the case for innocence has merit?

I have to say one thing, which is the thing that initially made me suspicious of Amanda Knox - why blame an innocent man, Patrick Lumumba, landing an innocent man in jail, driving his establishment out of business & basically ruining his life? (her conviction for that slander was upheld)

Interesting. This episode is one of the things that convinced me of the opposite conclusion (the other is the all-too-convenient fact of the 2 main suspects being on hand at the time the crime was discovered). A false confession and arrest resulting from an all-night interrogation session with no safeguards for the rights of the victim, is virtually a guaranteed indicator of a wrongful prosecution. Such statements are entirely the work of the interrogators, who bear complete responsibility for treatment meted out to Patrick Lumumba and his false arrest.

Ah, I hear you say, it wasn't a confession; it was an accusation! Oh, that changes everything! Not.