Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Chris_Halkides]

no connection

I hope this isn't considered to be off topic. I've been in Italy for a month and have spoken to many about this case. I haven't yet found one who believes that AK is innocent, but when pressed, their belief is strengthened, or indeed formed, by the continual, unrelenting criticism of the Italian justice system by Americans.

I would have thought that the pro-innocence case would be best served by non-criticism of, indeed respect for, the Italian justice system. Yet even in this thread you see insults galore. Is this smart? Can't Italy, as an ancient civilisation, and still one of the world's top ten economies, be trusted to run a fair trial? Is continual reference to Italy as a backward and uncivilised country a good idea, even in this forum?

Judging by the murder of Sarah Scazzi, Italy cannot be trusted to run a fair trial. Judging by the murder of Christopher Byers and his two companions (the West Memphis Three case), the United States cannot be trusted, either. The citizens of both nations ought to be adult enough to accept well reasoned critiques of their system IMO. However, I am struck by the remarkably poor reasoning skills displayed by the people with whom you discussed this case. Knox and Sollecito are either innocent or guilty, and one makes up one's mind on the basis of the evidence; that is quite a separate question from how well the Italian CJ system works.

 

[anglolawyer]

In first world nations like Italy I would guess the law requires doors to open from the inside without a key. Remember all the PIP theories that have Rudi going back to MK's room for the keys when he realizes that the door requires a key?

I am not so much interested in PGP theories as in burglar theories. Let's let him check the front door on exiting F's room (it's called 'casing the joint'). A basic and automatic procedure in his line of business.

The wind can blow shut what it blows open. the risk calculation is no more valuable than Leila Schneps and her daughter's work on probabilities. For a rational person, perhaps but a crazed killer that thought his victim had told others about their date would have acted irrationally.

Blow tight shut? OK, maybe. But don't compare this point with Leila's. it's not about mathematical probability, just inference about human behaviour.

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn - i.e. your best point.

I'll take that as a compliment.

meme - a bullet - but glass outside would be there either way unless the shutter were closed as glass flies in both directions.

You are missing the point. You have cited lack of glass outside as an indicator of staging (i.e. by means of rock thrown from inside with shutter closed - the PGPs preferred theory) but the indisputable fact that glass sprayed far into the room, almost to the door, proves the rock was thrown from outside so, if there was no glass on the grass outside, this only means that no glass in fact fell outside or that it did but the cops did not look hard enough. It does not serve as an indicator of staging. Fifty pages.

 

[Kaosium]

I hope this isn't considered to be off topic. I've been in Italy for a month and have spoken to many about this case. I haven't yet found one who believes that AK is innocent, but when pressed, their belief is strengthened, or indeed formed, by the continual, unrelenting criticism of the Italian justice system by Americans.

I would have thought that the pro-innocence case would be best served by non-criticism of, indeed respect for, the Italian justice system. Yet even in this thread you see insults galore. Is this smart? Can't Italy, as an ancient civilisation, and still one of the world's top ten economies, be trusted to run a fair trial? Is continual reference to Italy as a backward and uncivilised country a good idea, even in this forum?

Heh, I've been following your thread in FC and was going to ask you if you'd heard about the case there but demurred as I didn't want to take the chance of (unintentionally) opening old wounds. I love the pictures, especially the one with the breathtaking balcony shot from Switzerland--what a view!

I'd agree that referring to Italy as backwards and uncivilized is probably not a good idea and is not really true, but criticism of their justice system is very tough to avoid if one relies on objective data. In a subjective sense, for those who've followed this case and others like it (Sarah Scazzi, Alberto Stasi) it's difficult (for some) to avoid occasionally ranting in unbridled rage about it!

However you're probably right that when pressed Italians are more likely to respond to such criticism negatively.

 

[Kaosium]

Kaosium thanks but who that Anglo guy inserting himself in an otherwise great post ?

Someone who took the time to learn about this particular subject and wrote a great post that I complimented and added to!

While I agree in principal wasn't one of the first US cases in NY about LCN found in a car of the suspect?

Did I forget a qualifier? I may have, though I'm aware that some places are starting or attempting to get LCN/LT DNA analysis admissible in court, and New York was the first state to do so from my recollection. I am unaware of just how the LCN/LT DNA was utilized by the prosecution in that case, but the same principles would apply. In the case of the knife there's an easy explanation of how secondary transfer could have occurred, as Amanda lived with Meredith and could easily get it on her. In the case you mention with the car, if there was no such likelihood of that DNA getting in the car by transfer and the lab was qualified to handle LCN/LT DNA and thus could rule out contamination it would be a different situation entirely.

 

[Alt+F4]

Judging by the murder of Sarah Scazzi, Italy cannot be trusted to run a fair trial. Judging by the murder of Christopher Byers and his two companions (the West Memphis Three case), the United States cannot be trusted, either.

Sweeping generalizations for both Italy and the U.S.

You have zero understanding of how the judicial system works in the United States. The West Memphis Three case was a state criminal prosecution, not a federal one. The judgments in that case were based on the legal opinions of The State of Arkansas, not the United States as entire nation.

 

[Grinder]

Sweeping generalizations for both Italy and the U.S.

You have zero understanding of how the judicial system works in the United States. The West Memphis Three case was a state criminal prosecution, not a federal one. The judgments in that case were based on the legal opinions of The State of Arkansas, not the United States as entire nation.

The state laws must conform to the US constitution and that's why the US Supreme Court can rule on state cases. Your attack, if valid, would mean that no comparison of the US could be made with most if not all of Europe.

Maybe you should try ALT CRTL DEL

 

[Mary_H]

Sweeping generalizations for both Italy and the U.S.

You have zero understanding of how the judicial system works in the United States. The West Memphis Three case was a state criminal prosecution, not a federal one. The judgments in that case were based on the legal opinions of The State of Arkansas, not the United States as entire nation.

That's halides1, all right. Zero understanding of everything.

 

[Grinder]

I am not so much interested in PGP theories as in burglar theories. Let's let him check the front door on exiting F's room (it's called 'casing the joint'). A basic and automatic procedure in his line of business.

I said PIP which you are very interested in and you said he wouldn't grab stuff because he could get it out because of the front door. You could be right but it would be strange to check if the door could be opened from inside. Is it the case that Italian doors need a key to get out or elsewhere in the old world?

Blow tight shut? OK, maybe. But don't compare this point with Leila's. it's not about mathematical probability, just inference about human behaviour.

Both were bad maths.

I'll take that as a compliment.

As intended.

You are missing the point. You have cited lack of glass outside as an indicator of staging (i.e. by means of rock thrown from inside with shutter closed - the PGPs preferred theory) but the indisputable fact that glass sprayed far into the room, almost to the door, proves the rock was thrown from outside so, if there was no glass on the grass outside, this only means that no glass in fact fell outside or that it did but the cops did not look hard enough. It does not serve as an indicator of staging. Fifty pages.

No I'm saying that the PLE not finding glass outside gave them another reason to be suspicious.

 

[Grinder]

Hey Mary since you're here - do you remember any early stories ever speculating it was a break-in gone bad?

 

[Alt+F4]

The state laws must conform to the US constitution.

Wow, wow, wow. You have no understanding of the United States Constitution, federalism or state law in the 50 states.

 

[Alt+F4]

Maybe you should try ALT CRTL DEL

Yawn.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the trial of the WM3

Sweeping generalizations for both Italy and the U.S.

You have zero understanding of how the judicial system works in the United States. The West Memphis Three case was a state criminal prosecution, not a federal one. The judgments in that case were based on the legal opinions of The State of Arkansas, not the United States as entire nation.

You misunderstood the point of my post, which is that miscarriages of justice happen all over the world. The last time I checked, the state of Arkansas was still bound by the Constitution, yet it managed to produce an unfair trial. I suggest you read up on the trial and then you may get the gist of what I am saying. Maybe not, though.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

specifics needed

Wow, wow, wow. You have no understanding of the United States Constitution, federalism or state law in the 50 states.

You are making assertions without facts or specifics. Please try harder.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill you just grab onto expressions and repeat them endlessly. Fog of nonsense, in situ, now continuous data sampling as supplied on the greatest source known to mankind FB.

The issue for Leila Schneps isn't mainly the nature of DNA testing but rather that the there could have been more than one transfer of touch DNA or contamination in the lab.

If two well handled and to protocol samples came to the same result it would be significantly more reliable than just one. The problem here is they weren't handled well.

Your repeating that a DNA test is only 30% reliable is bunk. Rudi's results from her body, purse, sleave etc. have never been questioned by anyone.

The argument made by Hellmann that a second test of unreliable material is correct because of the handling, What Leila Schneps and daughter Coralie are trying to say is that testing a second time is the same as being able to split the sample and run the test more than once. They are correct in that but neglect that the second sample whether found at the same time or later still could be a result of bad protocol and a transfer or contamination.

Grinder - it's what they are called. What terms would you use?

I have fourth-year university math. By introducing her coin toss analogy, Leila is making a rookie math mistake.

 

[Mary_H]

I recall it differently. I recall that from the very beginning the reporting centered around a sex party, ritual etc. I do not recall the reporting ever stating that it looked like a break-in gone bad.

<snip>

The early stories did not speak of a burglary gone bad - go look it up. From the very beginning they spoke of sex gone bad. The early reports made it sound like the room was locked from the inside and the perp escaped through a broken window in her room.

I doubt you'll find a story with a burglary gone bad. They thought the break-in odd to say the least from day one. I do remember and can't find one story that talks about a burglary.

Why don't you argue with me about something I've actually said? My contention was that it didn't occur to anyone at first to call it staged, not that it was a break-in gone bad (a term I didn't use).

Just because they didn't mention Filomena's room in the citations you gave doesn't mean they weren't aware of it or thinking about it.

From a series of articles in the Telegraph, I have gathered that first mention of a staging was on November 5th. This fits with the framing of the defendants, because I believe the prosecution had starting tapping Amanda and Raffaele's phones on the 4th or 5th. Before that, the idea of a staging was not necessary.

Then of course, on the 9th, Claudia Matteini went to town: “The three, realising what had happened, quickly left the house, creating a mess with the intention of simulating a break-in, spreading blood everywhere, and in an attempt to clean up drops of blood in the bath, on the ground and in the sink."

 

[Grinder]

Wow, wow, wow. You have no understanding of the United States Constitution, federalism or state law in the 50 states.

Have you ever heard of Miranda? Do you think that's a state law? Which state?

You have no understanding of the US system.

Yawn.

 

[Bill Williams]

And yet I've read in this very thread how influential it has been. Assuming this is the case, wouldn't the posts which refer to the Italian system as barbaric be a very bad idea?

Why? Should it continue?

 

[Mary_H]

I hope this isn't considered to be off topic. I've been in Italy for a month and have spoken to many about this case. I haven't yet found one who believes that AK is innocent, but when pressed, their belief is strengthened, or indeed formed, by the continual, unrelenting criticism of the Italian justice system by Americans.

I would have thought that the pro-innocence case would be best served by non-criticism of, indeed respect for, the Italian justice system. Yet even in this thread you see insults galore. Is this smart? Can't Italy, as an ancient civilisation, and still one of the world's top ten economies, be trusted to run a fair trial? Is continual reference to Italy as a backward and uncivilised country a good idea, even in this forum?

lionking, nobody criticized the Italian justice system until they messed up. In fact, we didn't criticize them until months after they messed up. Do you think that systems that mess up should not be criticized? If so, why not? Because they might go on the defensive and do worse? Because they might seek revenge?

Shouldn't a justice system, of all systems, be oblivious to criticism? They are supposed to be looking at the law and the evidence, not at what people say about them. It speaks very poorly of them to suggest they would react negatively to insults. That's what dictators do.

 

[Grinder]

Why don't you argue with me about something I've actually said? My contention was that it didn't occur to anyone at first to call it staged, not that it was a break-in gone bad (a term I didn't use).

Just because they didn't mention Filomena's room in the citations you gave doesn't mean they weren't aware of it or thinking about it.

From a series of articles in the Telegraph, I have gathered that first mention of a staging was on November 5th. This fits with the framing of the defendants, because I believe the prosecution had starting tapping Amanda and Raffaele's phones on the 4th or 5th. Before that, the idea of a staging was not necessary.

Then of course, on the 9th, Claudia Matteini went to town: “The three, realising what had happened, quickly left the house, creating a mess with the intention of simulating a break-in, spreading blood everywhere, and in an attempt to clean up drops of blood in the bath, on the ground and in the sink."

Sorry Mary but as one of the few that followed the case from the very first I genuinely wondered if you remembered.

What is interesting is that as far as I remember no mention was made of a burglary gone bad until the FOA pushed it. I believe it is an indication that the PLE thought staging from the beginning. Today most here would say that burglary gone bad is obvious, Occam s razor, yet why didn't the press write that on the 2nd, the 3rd or the 4th?

It isn't so much when staging was mentioned as why no one speculated on what most PIP believe today.

The fact that they didn't mention F's room could be an example of the only thing the PLE didn't leak. They had the wrong window and that could have trapped Rudi as it turned out.

 

[anglolawyer]

I said PIP which you are very interested in and you said he wouldn't grab stuff because he could get it out because of the front door. You could be right but it would be strange to check if the door could be opened from inside. Is it the case that Italian doors need a key to get out or elsewhere in the old world?

Sorry, PIP, right. I happen not to agree with that idea because I think Guede heard her unlock the front door, call out 'anyone there' and then lock the door from the inside. And I also think a burglar would be likely to be interested in means of escape pretty much straightaway. A mortice lock (if that's the right word) is also visibly of a kind for which you need a key, so just a glance on his way to the fridge would do it.

Both were bad maths.

My point had nothing to do with maths at all.

No I'm saying that the PLE not finding glass outside gave them another reason to be suspicious.

I getcha and I take your point, but in discussion here that fine distinction seems to get lost and people get to talking about whether there really was glass on the ground or not and I am saying it's irrelevant because we know the rock was thrown from outside.