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

[Bill Williams]

You are just being disrespectful. Knowledge of patients is true clinical expertise, not second-degree training. Knowledge is the result of experience (not ones "own struggle with sleep").

However it's your standard, you are basically making up stuff on everything (and you appear to me as always keen to attempting to discredit an interlocutor, never about actually building your own arguments); You were stating that Knox and Sollecito were "factually" found to be psychopatologically normal, weren't you?

Welcome back!! I thought you'd be too embarrassed to return. I was wrong.

But as for finding no psychopathology in Knox and Sollecito, that was Massei's finding. I guess it's not been translated into Italian yet, otherwise you would know.

 

[Skind]

You are just being disrespectful. Knowledge of patients is true clinical expertise, not second-degree training. Knowledge is the result of experience (not ones "own struggle with sleep").

You should probably learn the meaning of the term 'clinical expertise' before mis-using it.

And knowledge is not the result of experience. It's the result of; direct teaching, self directed learning, validated deduction, reflective learning, directed learning and peer teaching. There is a correlation between experience and knowledge, but that's generally due to learning opportunities developing roughly in line with experience. There is no linear causative relationship between experience and knowledge. 1 year, 5 years, 10 years of reliving the same experience will not expand your knowledge.

I've dealt with clients who have had sleep deprivation issues, and your description was so laughable as to cast extreme suspicion on your claims to lived experience.

 

[Machiavelli]

Why did the PLE not collect those clothes? It's not really complicated, Machiavelli..... really, it's not.

When did you beat up your wife the last time?

You see, I simply do not intend to "answer" questions which are deliberately not set within a transparent and logically correct frame.
Would you like me to explain how a question should be put on a topic, in order to be neutral?

 

[Machiavelli]

You should probably learn the meaning of the term 'clinical expertise' before mis-using it.

And knowledge is not the result of experience. It's the result of; direct teaching, self directed learning, validated deduction, reflective learning, directed learning and peer teaching. (...)

Oh really? And I tell you something, all this is based on experience. It stems from experience. You can study a reality whe you have experience of it.
So it is, indeed, the result of experience (albeit not a direct result). I find your condescendence still disrespectful.

 

[Machiavelli]

I've dealt with clients who have had sleep deprivation issues, and your description was so laughable as to cast extreme suspicion on your claims to lived experience.

Really? And what about Knox's hand writing?
Your patients, don't they have fine movements disturbances of the hand? Did you notice people with acute sleep deprivation symptoms have a slightly trembling hand writing?
Does Knox hand writing have them?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Dreaming in Ada, Oklahoma

Machiavelli,

The police got Karl Fontenot to confess falsely after two hours. This point has been made several times before.

 

[Skind]

Oh really? And I tell you something, all this is based on experience. It stems from experience. You can study a reality whe you have experience of it.
So it is, indeed, the result of experience (albeit not a direct result). I find your condescendence still disrespectful.

I find your inability to note your misuse of the term 'clinical expertise' arrogant.

And no - as I've JUST pointed out - knowledge is NOT the result of experience! Knowledge is aquired through a learning process which can include - but does not intrinsically require - the sort of direct lived experience you are trying to claim it does. There is no experience = therefore learning. Experience without learning is simply repetition.

Stop changing your arguements halfway through - you've been told this before.

Also, my 'condescendence' is not direspectful as disrespect requires there be a need for the respect in the first place. You attempted to use your limited lived experience as evidence of how sleep deprived people behave. Amongst this, you claimed sleep deprived people are always sleep seeking. Unfortunetly for you, sleep avoidance and other behavioural issues are front and centre issues in dealing with sleep deprivation. There's even a specific name for it - behaviorally induced insufficient sleep syndrome.

 

[Bill Williams]

When did you beat up your wife the last time?

You see, I simply do not intend to "answer" questions which are deliberately not set within a transparent and logically correct frame.
Would you like me to explain how a question should be put on a topic, in order to be neutral?

I'd like that. It would show how you can embarrass yourself even unnecessarily!

For the record, why did the PLE not collect and test Knox's clothes she claimed to be wearing Nov. 1?

 

[Skind]

Really? And what about Knox's hand writing?
Your patients, don't they have fine movements disturbances of the hand? Did you notice people with acute sleep deprivation symptoms have a slightly trembling hand writing?
Does Knox hand writing have them?

First, tremors are not essential to acute sleep deprivation.
Second, Knox is not required to have been acutely sleep deprived in order to have been in a heightened suggestible state, or tired and easily confused (note, I use confused in the normal way, not the 'fugue state' way you - and no one else - use it.)

I've seen Knox's hand writing on her note, and it looks awful, both in form and content compared to earlier and later examples of her writing.

I would certainly like to see a copy of her 'statement'. Provide it.

 

[Briars]

He added that one evening, a little after eight o’clock, Raffaele came in - he knew him by sight because he often went to the store - and he let him in. And ‚with him there was Ms. Knox‛ (pages 76 and 77 hearing of March 21, 2009).Witness Quintavalle, at the hearing on March 21, 2009, was asked many questions to uncover elements of information that would be useful in verifying his reliability. This was mainly because though his meeting with Amanda occurred early in the 84 morning (at 7:45 am) on November 2, 2007, he only made a statement about it in November 2008 and did not mention it earlier, even when Inspector Volturno questioned him a few days after Meredith’s murder. This Court deems that the testimony of Quintavalle is reliable. It was discovered that Inspector Volturno did not ask Quintavalle if, on the morning of November 2, he saw Amanda Knox in his shop.
My recollection is that it was Q that said he wasn't asked about Amanda, but regardless it doesn't meet the smell test even in Italy to believe that if asked about a boy that you wouldn't mention this very unusual crack of dawn siting of a girl he had just met with the boy in question.

Show just a little skepticism. Small shop owner that knew his customers, now who said that?

ETA - they were helping convict the she-devil that all knew was guilty but the PLE needed people to help as per the cub reporter. How can the PGP not be troubled by all the witnesses being found by the media mostly by one young reporter?

Yes thanks that's my point Sollecito was the regular customer who Q knew . Amanda had only been in a two times and with Sollecito.He was asked about Sollecito who he was familiar with. Seeing Amanda without him early in the morning, it is quite natural that he didn't make the connection. He'd only seen her twice and never alone. She stood out not as the girl Sollecito was with but memorable because of the early hour. He was able to recall some things about her and the fact she didn't purchase anything.

 

[Briars]

What makes you think the victim didn't scream or that you need to make light of it? The location of the homes faced the cottage . The scream was heard and the witnesses were clear that it was prolonged and startling. By the way you have no business telling Machiavelli he should be embarrassed.

 

[RWVBWL]

Yes thanks that's my point Sollecito was the regular customer who Q knew . Amanda had only been in a two times and with Sollecito.He was asked about Sollecito who he was familiar with. Seeing Amanda without him early in the morning, it is quite natural that he didn't make the connection. He'd only seen her twice and never alone. She stood out not as the girl Sollecito was with but memorable because of the early hour. He was able to recall some things about her and the fact she didn't purchase anything.

Brairs,
I thought there is a bleach reciept floatin' around somewhere,
I heard supposedly that Fulcanelli has it,
provin that AK did buy bleach.

That's baloney, Brairs!

Look,
I used to run a retail store for over 20 years, a surfshop.
+being a young buck who then became an old geezer, as Q is,
I would always make a mental note of the young, hot lookin' chicks that came into my store. Men do it every day, all day long, especially in small, privately owned stores.

Aren't Italians generally known as horny men, so to say?
In my expert opinion, Q should have easily recognized Amanda,
if she did indeed come into his store that morning, even without Harry Potter, err, I mean Raff!

Didn't Q, at some point, mention something Amanda's eye color?
Sure he did.


The problem is when questioned by the police +shown pix,
that the dude didn't remember seeing AK was in his shop,
just a few days later.

BUT he did so months+months later.
Right...

 

[Bill Williams]

What makes you think the victim didn't scream or that you need to make light of it? The location of the homes faced the cottage . The scream was heard and the witnesses were clear that it was prolonged and startling. By the way you have no business telling Machiavelli he should be embarrassed.

Why? Did you read his statement of expertise in sleep issues? Did you read his comments on false/compliant confessions?

It's not so much he's claiming it as an opinion he's claiming expertise. At length! Hopefully he's not representative of Italian justice. His answer to, "why did the PLE not collect and analyze Knox's clothes?" Was "when did you stop beating your wife?" With answers like that, no wonder this case went so far off the rails.

 

[Briars]

Just listened to the recent taped interview of Alan Dershowitz on Amanda Knox. Harvard law professor who believes she is guilty. Worth a listen, he gets the unwillingness of many Americans to deal with the case facts.That will change as more information becomes available.

 

[Bill Williams]

Just listened to the recent taped interview of Alan Dershowitz on Amanda Knox. Harvard law professor who believes she is guilty. Worth a listen, he gets the unwillingness of many Americans to deal with the case facts.That will change as more information becomes available.

Do you have a link?

I'll post some links from Jeffery Tobin, legal analyst for CNN. He's careful to remain as neutral as possible, but I particularly like one quote of his.... "It is a fairly straight forward, if horrible crime. What has never been clear is why Amanda Knox and her boyfriend could be participants in this."

 

[Bill Williams]

So far the only thing I can find about Dershowitz is his belief that the "false confession" which also names Lumumba is proof of her guilt. He also says that the only reason she's viewed positively in the United States is because of "her beautiful face," which, acc. to him, is why the real evidence has never been heard in America.

Dershowitz, on a first search, seems not to get the evidence at all. But he's the law professor and I'm just me.

 

[RWVBWL]

It's late, it's chilly, I like to read under the lamplight when high on heroin...

Why would someone bother to bring a paper daily if not to read it? I find your assumption of what he could read and retain offensive. The local Umbrian paper wrote a kind and thoughtful tribute to Curatolo who they knew personally.A man who did take an interest in their paper . It gives a far greater and more intelligent assessment than anything Nancy ,you ,or Rose came up with. Curatolo was reading, not sitting there for the purpose of watching the defendants. We all people watch to some degree but have no idea when people come or go unless our interest is above the norm and we are doing little else other than watching them.

So Antonio Curatolo is outside, in the open,


kickin' it on his park bench, high on heroin,




reading the local newspaper.
Cool...


Miss Meredith Kercher is nearby,
just returned home+inside her flat,
presumably all alone when she entered,
closed+locked her front door on that chilly November night,
wouldn't you agree?

I would like to think that Meredith,
with a borrowed history book, was gettin' ready to study,
as she musta absent mindedly thought that she, as did her other English gal pals,
had class tomorrow morning, even though it was a holiday...

But strangely, after closing+locking her front door,
Mez never took off her jacket, turned on her heater,
nor made herself a cup of hot tea, nor a cup of hot coffee on that chilly night,
ya know, to keep her mental mind wide awake as she studied.
Weird...



Anyways, when Miss Kercher had a large knife bruatlly stabbed into her throat, she supposedly let out a very loud scream.
1 that was supposedly heard by a coupla different gals, right?

But how loud was The Scream?
If 3 people were holding her,
I kinda doubt Meredith was able to cup her hands together,
place 'em around her mouth and then scream...

According to the prosecution,
Filomena, her friend, housemate+landlord,
had her bedroom window broken AFTER Meredith was slain, correct?
Ya know, to stage the crime scene+throw investigators off the trail, right?


So how the heck did Nara, who was inside her own apartment quite a ways away, with all her own windows closed too, hear a scream coming from a house that was not next door to her own, a flat that had it's front door closed and had all the windows shut?
Where I live,
I can barely hear the neighbors loudly arguing', right next door some 20 feet away,
after they shut their windows! Can you hear your own neighbors argue?
Or scream from inside their house, apartment, flat with the doors+windows closed?


How come ol' Antonio Curatolo,
high on heroin+kickin' it outside on his park bench late at night,





DID NOT HEAR this same scream?
Didn't he hear some people that he thinks were Raff+Amanda just arguin'?
Weird how he DID NOT hear The Scream!?!


Too bad, heck,
ol' Curatolo could have even given the correct time for this scream!!!
Wasn't Antonio supposedly wearin' a watch at the time?
But he forgot to wear it when called to testify in court when Judge Massei asked him to show it,
if I recall correctly...

Weird stuff...

 

[Dan O.]

Because, they are not completely innocent, and they are claiming to be completely innocent.

Your claim which you have no facts to back up has become a slanderous attack.

 

[anglolawyer]

Down the bunny hole they are demanding citations in support of this

Do you [Machiavelli] really imagine the ECHR would not regard the time of the interrogation and the preceding exhaustion of her many hours at the questura as relevant? At what point was she informed of her right to remain silent and to legal counsel as a 'strongly suspected' person? Do you think that would be of no concern to the ECHR?

Chew on this which sets out ECHR guidance on the right to legal represenation which, of course, Amanda was denied at the questura, despite request. Some choice quotes and cases from the paper:

The Court has repeatedly held that the right of any person charged with a criminal offence to be effectively defended by a lawyer is a fundamental element of a fair trial

Imbrioscia v. Switzerland
24.11.1993
Although the “primary purpose” of Article 6 in criminal proceedings is “to ensure a fair trial by a ‘tribunal’”, it does not follow that it has no application to “pre-trial proceedings”.

“access to a lawyer should be provided as from the first interrogation of a suspect by the police, unless it is demonstrated in the light of the particular circumstances of each case that there are compelling reasons to restrict this right.”

I would like to see Italy attempting to run Machiavelli's formal suspect rule, in which the cops are free to do what they like until someone has been so declared.

Someone called McCall thinks the only consequence of an adverse finding on interrogation without a lawyer would be resulting inadmissibility of the evidence.

The argument seems premised on the idea that if a violation occurred your get an automatic get out of jail free card. That isn't how it works. At most the interrogation would be excluded and that has already happened.

But not with respect to calunnia, of which Amanda was convicted and sentenced to three years in jail. ECHR jurisprudence supports the claim that she did not receive a fair trial for that charge because she was denied access to legal counsel when a suspect. As Italy has used and wants to use her statements against her in other ways it seems to me well arguable that the entire process is tainted with unfairness and ought to be set aside. There are many other bases for challenge and I have set them out here and elsewhere for Jackie to go trawling for nit picks.

For McCall's benefit, I am not American pretending to be British. I am British pretending to be American pretending to be British.

 

[Dan O.]

A few days after the murder! Why would he think to mention Amanda, he couldn't possibly know she had any connection to the murder of Meredith until after the 6th.

Exactly. Quintavalle's memory of that visit is based on his belief that Amanda was guilty.