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

[acbytesla]

Sure but that's not what she did or what she is doing. She keeps the pro PIP propaganda coming. The DNA wasn't starch and no one ever said it was.
You came late and didn't follow her back in 2008 and 2009.

I'll bet you haven't taken the time to watch her presentation at SU.

CV said the following about the material found on the knife

"A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to granules of starch, thus matter of a vegetable nature."

Sure sounds like they said it was starch to me. I don't understand your quibbling over this point.

 

[Bill Williams]

Let me put it this way, Vogt was a reporter earning her paycheck by covering the case. As a result she was expected to report what the police and prosecution said without commentary. I don't fault her for that, however her relying on the 'Forensics Moderator' of PMF who had no real qualifications in the field for 'expert analysis' is something (amongst other things) that should embarrass her to this day. She had different standards she had to adhere to being paid by a newspaper to cover a story.

This could perhaps be true, that all Vogt initially was doing was passing on what the prosecution was saying. I have some sympathy for this - for instance she is not responsible for the headlines chosen to attract readers to the story.

However, Kaosium, you may have contradicted your own analysis of Vogt. In my view, she was the courtroom source for PMF.... but as you say obviously turned to tainted sources to get perspective on what she was writing.

I think she wrote as-if Mignini was only an objective observer, an observer passing on what Vogt in essence assumed was what would have been seen as-if video-taped..... as if the things Mignini ever alleged had, in fact, been videotaped and he was simply narrating what he saw on the screen.

But it's more than that. Recently in her blog she writes as if it was only an afterthought that she'd had a conversation with Mignini about what's what in the new trial. To me, anyway, it's obvious she wants to mask her dependence on Mignini, but portray the information similarly gleaned from him as it it is objective, video-like truth that Mignini is simply passing on unfiltered.

I'd be stuck to cite an example to the contrary of this thesis.

 

[Kaosium]

I haven’t been keeping up to date with developments in this case, I was wondering whether someone could bring me up to speed on the following:

Did Sollecito ever account for the 5.32am activity on the mobile phone and computer the morning after the murder or is he still sticking to the not waking until 10.30am version of events?

Yeah, he woke up, checked his messages, listened to some music then went back to sleep. I don't know why you think he was 'sticking' to anything, he never testified and Amanda was asleep when he did. It was Amanda who didn't wake up until 10:30 AM.

Did he change his account regarding being on the computer after 9.15pm on the night of the murder?

No, and he's entered evidence regarding human interaction on the computer until late into the night from the screensaver and keyboard light data. It was an addendum to his appeal that was disallowed due to being filed too late, but that's not the case with the new trial.

Did either Knox or Sollecito give a reason why they both turned their mobile phones off at the same time?

Amanda had just gotten the night off work and they went all kissy-face and didn't want to be disturbed.

Are both prosecution and defence now agreed that Meredith died in the 9-10pm timeframe?

At the last trial it appeared Comodi went with a ~10:00 PM ToD which seemed to confuse some as Mignini was still talking about Curatolo and the 11:45 ToD. I don't know what the new prosecution theory is.

 

[Grinder]

Let me put it this way, Vogt was a reporter earning her paycheck by covering the case. As a result she was expected to report what the police and prosecution said without commentary. I don't fault her for that, however her relying on the 'Forensics Moderator' of PMF who had no real qualifications in the field for 'expert analysis' is something (amongst other things) that should embarrass her to this day. She had different standards she had to adhere to being paid by a newspaper to cover a story.

She should be embarrassed you are correct. The PI should be embarrassed that they let the Nikki Laura Wray story run.

Candace Dempsey on the other hand had the opportunity to be more of an investigative journalist and get to the actual truth of the matter. In this case there are only two basic outcomes: either Raffaele and Amanda were involved, or they were not. Either the truth was mostly with the defense, or it was mostly with the prosecution. It is perfectly ethical to come to the conclusion that one 'side' is more likely to have the truth of the matter, in fact it's almost certain to be the case in an instance like this. That she chose to cultivate sources that others eschewed is to her credit not detriment. She did not start advocating anything, she investigated and came to the determination Amanda and Raffaele were innocent and then advocated because she realized it was the right thing to do.

Ethical but not toi keep referring to yourself as a journalist. She has not come out and said that she was a pro Knox spokesperson early on.

Well I don't think either of knows the validity of her sources. She has used FOA language from early on without saying she was in their camp.

As for mistakes, everyone makes them, it's part of being human, especially when dealing with highly complex subjects.

The "mistakes" are strangely in one direction and this most recent one has not been corrected. You really think she didn't know the DNA wasn't never found to be starch?

 

[Grinder]

Bill what do you think the name Vogt used from the courtroom when working for PMF was?

 

[acbytesla]

Thanks for taking the time. Yes, I think being part of a forum entitled "the case for innocence" compromises her journalistic integrity beyond how much it was already compromised. The event was put together by FOA.

So Grinder? The facts are behind innocence and have been from the beginning. If her conclusion and facts are incorrect and misleading that would demonstrate a lack of journalistic integrity. Reporting the facts and the truth DO NOT.

I won't have time to review it again but as I recall she made statements that couldn't be shown to be true.

Sorry Grinder, You should point out what Candace said was false. I'm not saying that Candace didn't make a couple of mistakes over the last 5 years, but overall Candace has been RIGHT ON.

 

[RandyN]

Now THAT would be a fascinating motivations report to read.

So far there is nothing, nada, nil, niente, zilch, zero.... to even suggest that Sollecito and Knox were involved with this horrible crime. So far, it seems, EVERYTHING the ISC ordered reevaluated has gone the defence's way...

So on what basis would Nencini reinterpret Hellmann's and Zanetti's, "they didn't do it," with a, "they may know something, but the prosecution simply didn't prove it"?

I mean, is it too much to ask the Italian judiciary to be logical? Hellmann says they didn't do it, the ISC reverses that saying more stuff needs to be examined, the de novo trial looks at that stuff and finds nothing.....

...... and all of a sudden that elevates a "they didn't do it," to "not proven"?

I really do not understand Italy. The country that brought the world Da Vinci, Galileo, and Michaelangelo..... as well as Masonic conspiracies!..... Italy just defies sense sometimes.

Probably not important but DaVinci in his later years realized that Italy was a joke and so he moved and settled in France to live out his days...once he left Italy he never returned.

 

[The Third Man]

Yeah, he woke up, checked his messages, listened to some music then went back to sleep. I don't know why you think he was 'sticking' to anything, he never testified and Amanda was asleep when he did. It was Amanda who didn't wake up until 10:30 AM.


No, and he's entered evidence regarding human interaction on the computer until late into the night from the screensaver and keyboard light data. It was an addendum to his appeal that was disallowed due to being filed too late, but that's not the case with the new trial.



Amanda had just gotten the night off work and they went all kissy-face and didn't want to be disturbed.



At the last trial it appeared Comodi went with a ~10:00 PM ToD which seemed to confuse some as Mignini was still talking about Curatolo and the 11:45 ToD. I don't know what the new prosecution theory is.

Thanks to you and Bill for getting back to me on this. Regarding the above I thought that in the original statements both stated that they didn't wake up until 10am, Amanda 10 and Raf 10.30, I apologise if I'm in error, as I said I haven't looked at this for some time.

 

[Kaosium]

This could perhaps be true, that all Vogt initially was doing was passing on what the prosecution was saying. I have some sympathy for this - for instance she is not responsible for the headlines chosen to attract readers to the story.

However, Kaosium, you may have contradicted your own analysis of Vogt. In my view, she was the courtroom source for PMF.... but as you say obviously turned to tainted sources to get perspective on what she was writing.

Actually I meant the same thing you just said, as a part of her duties she had to report on what the press and prosecution was saying, it was when she started quoting PMF biology majors working in the fashion industry as expert analysts and writing stories from PMF's point of view that accused Chris Mellas of 'crimes' that she went off the reservation.

I think she wrote as-if Mignini was only an objective observer, an observer passing on what Vogt in essence assumed was what would have been seen as-if video-taped..... as if the things Mignini ever alleged had, in fact, been videotaped and he was simply narrating what he saw on the screen.

But it's more than that. Recently in her blog she writes as if it was only an afterthought that she'd had a conversation with Mignini about what's what in the new trial. To me, anyway, it's obvious she wants to mask her dependence on Mignini, but portray the information similarly gleaned from him as it it is objective, video-like truth that Mignini is simply passing on unfiltered.

I'd be stuck to cite an example to the contrary of this thesis.

Personally I want to hear everything Mignini has to say. I think he should be wiretapped. Even better, a reality show!

 

[charlatan]

Vogt is a journalism graduate that had written at least one book and was writing freelance from Germany and Italy. She was in court for most of the hearings.



Candace had just begun writing a "readers" blog. She picked upon the story and became a spokesperson for the pro Amanda position very early on. She has never disclosed when she actually was in Perugia but it seemed she stayed in Seattle but had "sources" the PGP always thought started with Chris Mellas, Amanda's step-father. She also seems to formed a relationship with Preston and Frank Sfarzo. Both of those people were part of FOA (friends of Amanda)

By February of 2008 she was pitching a book and never missed an opportunity to promote it. She campaigned relentlessly to get the PIP fans to vote her book some obscure award. She wrote the book in the true crime genre which precludes the need for footnotes.

Candace's blog was filled with inaccuracies including the most recent mention of the DNA being starch. I've pointed these out in the past and the response is that it is just a blog so it need not be accurate, just opinions.

She long ago gave up any appearance of any sort of objectivity.

You can look at her speech at a FOA forum at Seattle University before the first appeal and judge a bit for yourself.

And if Dempsey were filing reports for CNN you might have a point, but Dempsey is a local opinion blogger who doesn't try to mask her obvious POV on the case. Vogt is a freelance journalist who pens thinly-veiled hit pieces for national publications under the guise of objective journalism. Dempsey needs an editor. Vogt needs a course in journalistic ethics. It's interesting to note that she's doubled down on her Knox derangement syndrome even as Nadeau has moderated hers.

I think Bill is on to something re her "special" relationship with Mignini. Vogt and Follain were the the only journos who covered Mignini's Honor Bound lawsuit, complete with quotes from the man himself.

 

[RoseMontague]

Let me put it this way, Vogt was a reporter earning her paycheck by covering the case. As a result she was expected to report what the police and prosecution said without commentary. I don't fault her for that, however her relying on the 'Forensics Moderator' of PMF who had no real qualifications in the field for 'expert analysis' is something (amongst other things) that should embarrass her to this day. She had different standards she had to adhere to being paid by a newspaper to cover a story.

Candace Dempsey on the other hand had the opportunity to be more of an investigative journalist and get to the actual truth of the matter. In this case there are only two basic outcomes: either Raffaele and Amanda were involved, or they were not. Either the truth was mostly with the defense, or it was mostly with the prosecution. It is perfectly ethical to come to the conclusion that one 'side' is more likely to have the truth of the matter, in fact it's almost certain to be the case in an instance like this. That she chose to cultivate sources that others eschewed is to her credit not detriment. She did not start advocating anything, she investigated and came to the determination Amanda and Raffaele were innocent and then advocated because she realized it was the right thing to do.

As for mistakes, everyone makes them, it's part of being human, especially when dealing with highly complex subjects.

I think these two are in two different situations. Vogt spends a lot of time in Italy, her husband was born there and her kids have traveled and stayed in Italy for substantial periods of time. She knows which way the wind is blowing. She has to be careful and if things seem a bit slanted towards the prosecution case, it is probably less so than some of the Italian journalists.

Dempsey is a bit more free to state an opinion and has not hesitated to do so. I don't think this has hurt her career by doing so. I am not so sure I could say the same if Vogt had taken that route.

Barbie has not hesitated to worm herself in by taking the side of guilt and making friends and contacts in Italy as well as the UK. And now has a movie deal to go with her book. I can rely on Vogt to present the prosecution side of the case without too much embellishment. I think Dempsey is more knowledgeable about the case and she has researched it extensively. Barbie has picked up a bunch of factoids and rumors and strung them together with some speculation without too much trouble taken to double check the facts she has taken from various sources. Her personal reflections about the journalists and some of the principals in the case is probably the most valuable thing I can say about her writing.

 

[Grinder]

So Grinder? The facts are behind innocence and have been from the beginning. If her conclusion and facts are incorrect and misleading that would demonstrate a lack of journalistic integrity. Reporting the facts and the truth DO NOT.


Sorry Grinder, You should point out what Candace said was false. I'm not saying that Candace didn't make a couple of mistakes over the last 5 years, but overall Candace has been RIGHT ON.

Tesla she said in her most recent story that the DNA of Meredith turned out to be starch which is not true.

She said that Rudy left an enormous amount of DNA which at best is hyperbole.

It's not a couple of mistakes. It's mindless propaganda.

Do you think referring to the judge as Dr. No is cute or productive?

 

[Grinder]

And if Dempsey were filing reports for CNN you might have a point, but Dempsey is a local opinion blogger who doesn't try to mask her obvious POV on the case. Vogt is a freelance journalist who pens thinly-veiled hit pieces for national publications under the guise of objective journalism. Dempsey needs an editor. Vogt needs a course in journalistic ethics. It's interesting to note that she's doubled down on her Knox derangement syndrome even as Nadeau has moderated hers.

I think Bill is on to something re her "special" relationship with Mignini. Vogt and Follain were the the only journos who covered Mignini's Honor Bound lawsuit, complete with quotes from the man himself.

That's not how she billed herself. So you now say she's not a journalist in this case which is what I've been saying. Show me when she first said that I'm not reporting just offering my opinions.

 

[charlatan]

Let me put it this way, Vogt was a reporter earning her paycheck by covering the case. As a result she was expected to report what the police and prosecution said without commentary. I don't fault her for that, however her relying on the 'Forensics Moderator' of PMF who had no real qualifications in the field for 'expert analysis' is something (amongst other things) that should embarrass her to this day. She had different standards she had to adhere to being paid by a newspaper to cover a story.

And let's not forget that she's currently pimping the hell out of PMF's pro-guilt wiki on her weirdly Knox-obsessed professional website.

 

[Grinder]

I think these two are in two different situations. Vogt spends a lot of time in Italy, her husband was born there and her kids have traveled and stayed in Italy for substantial periods of time. She knows which way the wind is blowing. She has to be careful and if things seem a bit slanted towards the prosecution case, it is probably less so than some of the Italian journalists.

Are you sure? Are you sure you're not describing Barbie?

Andrea Vogt is a journalist and author who reports on crime, politics and social affairs in Europe and the U.S. Her dispatches have appeared internationally in print, online, radio and broadcast media, including The Guardian, BBC, The Daily Telegraph, The Week, The Independent, CNN, Seattlepi.com and The Seattle Times. She is fluent and published in English, German and Italian.

Born and raised near a small logging town in the Pacific Northwest, she earned her first dollar documenting load weights at the local lumber mill the summer she turned 16.

She studied political science and German at the University of Idaho and Universität Regensburg and, after completing degrees, began full-time work as a newspaper reporter in 1993. She covered breaking news in the Rocky Mountain West and earned journalism honors from the AP and Society of Professional Journalists while at the Lewiston Morning Tribune in Idaho and The Spokesman-Review in Washington State. She covered higher education, politics & legislative issues, crime and courts, and exposed the life on the lam of fugitive Koyote Karlos in an investigative story that helped lead to the accused fraudster’s arrest 10 years later by federal authorities. (You can read her original report here, as well as this story a decade later describing how the feds finally caught him). Her reporting on white supremacy extremists would later shape her first non-fiction book, Common Courage, which chronicled the story of the grassroots community battle led by a courageous Catholic priest against the Aryan Nations and other neo-nazi hate groups in the Pacific Northwest.

As a Fulbright Scholar in journalism and Arthur F. Burns fellow, she worked as a guest at the Munchner Merkur and Der Spiegel in Hamburg, where she published this story (German) about new social parity initiatives in the Schröder government and wrote about smuggling along the Polish-German border. A full time freelancer since 2001, her analysis has appeared in various print, broadcast and new media. For more detail see the full client list.

She served as editor of Bologna Inside, a guide for expatriates in Italy, and in 2011, co-authored Uomini Che Uccidono Le Donne, a collection of True Crime stories from Italy and Europe published in hardback by Rizzoli.

From 2007-2013 she reported on the Meredith Kercher slaying in Perugia, Italy for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and covered the Amanda Knox murder trial, appeal and high court rulings from the courtroom for its online successor, Seattlepi.com. Her in-depth reporting is highlighted as “a voice of reason” with “unbiased attention to detail” by two definitive books on the case.

In 2010 she researched and presented a five-part crime series that aired on the Italian national television station, La7. A second season with 10 new cases aired in 2011. In 2012, the 8-part television documentary series ”Crime:Crossing the Line” featuring her reporting on controversial murder cases in Hong Kong, Paris, Poland and elsewhere in Europe and the U.S. aired internationally on AETN’s Crime and Investigation Networks.
In 2012 she co-produced the one hour documentary Emilia: Cronaca di un Terramoto, about the devastating earthquakes to hit northern Italy. The program aired on DMAX Italia and was screened at documentary festivals in Emilia Romagna. She also reported for days from the quake epicenter for The Guardian.

In 2013, she co-produced the two-part mini series “Costa Concordia: The Whole Story,” which aired on The Discovery Channel in January to mark the one-year anniversary of the disaster, about which she also reported this story in the Sunday Telegraph.

Dempsey is a bit more free to state an opinion and has not hesitated to do so. I don't think this has hurt her career by doing so. I am not so sure I could say the same if Vogt had taken that route.

Barbie has not hesitated to worm herself in by taking the side of guilt and making friends and contacts in Italy as well as the UK. And now has a movie deal to go with her book. I can rely on Vogt to present the prosecution side of the case without too much embellishment. I think Dempsey is more knowledgeable about the case and she has researched it extensively. Barbie has picked up a bunch of factoids and rumors and strung them together with some speculation without too much trouble taken to double check the facts she has taken from various sources. Her personal reflections about the journalists and some of the principals in the case is probably the most valuable thing I can say about her writing.

I don't think Dempsey is knowledgeable for the time she has invested. She doesn't seem to have done anything but the blog and book in the last 6 years.

Dempsey repeats talking points like enormous amounts of DNA and DNA that turned out to be starch.

ETA - Candace refers to herself as a reporter in her blog. Not an opinion spewer.

here more of her reporting:

1. The sex games and stir-fry mushroom party theory was tossed after a new post-mortem cast doubt on whether Meredith was raped.

2. Middleaged male reporters have finally stopped perving Knox’s schoolgirl sex life. Paris Hilton and Britney Spears once again serve their needs. Meanwhile, the media shows zero interest in the sex lives of the two male suspects.

3. The robbery motive has sprung back to life, thanks to Rudy Guede, who is pointing the finger at Amanda. The Supreme Court has scoffed at his alibi, but he’s singing arias to the prosecutor.

Guede first said Amanda wasn’t there on the night of the murder. Next he said she was at the door and he heard her voice. Now he claims she was inside the house, quarreling with Kercher about money.

4. The international press hasn’t noticed the dramatic improvement in Knox’s legal battle. They’re too busy listening to Rudy sing.

5. The Supreme Court in April said it’s “indisputable and evident” that Guede took part in the murder. The role of the other two suspects remains a jigsaw puzzle.

Picture6. Police had claimed Knox and Guede called each other on their cellphones before and after the murder. Guede didn’t have a cellphone with him that night, his lawyer revealed.

6. Amanda’s computer was damaged in police custody, so they can’t evaluate her hard drive.

7. Alibis for all three suspects need clearing up. Questions, questions. We’d like to ask them questions.

8. The prosecution hasn’t proven Amanda and Raffaele knew Rudy (although they may have known OF him, sure, it’s a small town.).

We do know Rudy used to visit the boys downstairs in the girls’ house. But did he know Meredith? He says yes, but nobody will back up his tale.

 

[acbytesla]

Probably not important but DaVinci in his later years realized that Italy was a joke and so he moved and settled in France to live out his days...once he left Italy he never returned.

I don't know Randy if what happened in the Roman or the Da Vinci era has anything to do with what a disaster Italy's judicial system happens to be in 2013. I think these issues have more to do with issues since the unification of modern Italy in the late 1800s. Much of the problems have to do with crazy way the country came together and how it has been led since then. What's strange is that German and Italy both were large collection of sovereign states that became a larger nation. The difference really is Germany truly became one nation, Italy is a collection of communities that has a hard time putting aside there self interest for the good of their nation as a whole.

 

[RandyN]

Chris you full well know that C&V didn't say that the material on the knife that produced the DNA of Meredith was really starch.

From an interesting piece on the C&V report =

In summary, there are a few possible scenarios to consider:

-Based on the confusion with regards to the quantitation, potential questions emerge about the authenticity of the analysis.

-Is the DNA profile even reportable according to the laboratory’s guidelines, and….are such guidelines supported by appropriate validation studies?

-The DNA is actually a contaminant and was not present on the knife.

-The DNA was actually present on the knife. It clearly cannot be associated with blood. At the level that the DNA was detected, there are numerous possibilities for how the DNA may have gotten on the knife via innocent transfer.


CD wrote on Sept. 30, 2013 "In the last trial, a speck the police claimed was the victim’s DNA turned out to be starch. Independent experts won’t test the knife this time; the judge handed that task off to the carabinieri ris. (Update: Filippo Barni and Andrea Berti). I have my fingers crossed for fairness."

I think it is an example of the lack of understanding of this case.
Because you demur from further comment I can only pass on best source information and I do not find any source that says C&V said the DNA on the knife attributed to Meredith was starch.

ETA - since we know that the sample was destroyed by testing how could C&V possibly have determined that what Stefanoni tested was starch?

CD asked for opinions on her article before she sent it out. I mentioned the starch issue was unrelated to 36B and that her article implied the two were related.

I can only imagine that she didn't want to write another book explaining the distinction about the two. We could write pages why a sample of 5 to 10 picograms is useless for DNA identification. The corruption and incompetence involved in that is complicated and deserves a complete explanation and that would end up being worse than this sample actually being starch...not excusing her wrong point but I don't know that the public interest is at the level of detail that we are. Perhaps detailing the truth would be beyond the capacity of the general public interest level.

That said my point was that this issue would come back and bite you in the azz and Grinder is correct to point that out.

Now relating CD to AV is different. AFAIK CD has never used fake experts to back her contentions. Meanwhile we know Vogt used a florist or something as a DNA expert and she linked Brandon Mull site as a reliable and accurate one to get correct case details...this shows that she has no integrity or concern about accuracy at all.

At this point ...and I was originally someone who thought and expected guilt...Vogt and others who have followed closely are playing a game or else are so completely blind and oblivious as to be useless and should not be writing anything publicly on this matter. She is a blogger...fine. She does not belong as a source of any media that even pretends to be objective.

I dont think CD has asked anyone to view any PIP site for the correct details of this case. If she did then she is equally guilty ...of being a blogger and not a reporter. OTOH I dont think CD ever claimed to be a reporter. I could be wrong about that because I think this is a non issue that distracts from the terrible corruption that is going on in Italy.

 

[Kaosium]

Thanks to you and Bill for getting back to me on this. Regarding the above I thought that in the original statements both stated that they didn't wake up until 10am, Amanda 10 and Raf 10.30, I apologise if I'm in error, as I said I haven't looked at this for some time.

The original statements taken the night of the fifth were hardly all-inclusive of everything he did, and he didn't actually get up for the day until later that morning.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't think Dempsey is knowledgeable for the time she has invested. She doesn't seem to have done anything but the blog and book in the last 6 years.

Dempsey repeats talking points like enormous amounts of DNA and DNA that turned out to be starch.

CV said the following about the material found on the knife

"A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to granules of starch, thus matter of a vegetable nature."

Sure sounds like they said it was starch to me. I don't understand your quibbling over this point.

 

[RoseMontague]

Are you sure? Are you sure you're not describing Barbie?

Yes. I really had not taken much of an interest before until all the recent gnashing of teeth so I checked into it. Vogt's husband and kids travel with her to Italy and stay for extended periods of time. If you are interested in the details send me a PM.