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

[LondonJohn]

No, but I did hear that she has a PhD from Frederick II uni.

In any case, Knox's academic credentials are of absolutely no relevance to the case. It wouldn't make a jot of difference if she was a school drop-out at 14 or whether she had won some sort of "US University Scholar of the Year" award. Yes, her academic achievements speak somewhat to her character, but then extremely feted people have sometimes done unspeakably bad acts. All that matters is the actual evidence in the case indicating Knox's involvement in the murder - of which, I would argue, there is none that is credible or reliable.

On the other hand, the academic credentials of an expert witness ARE of some relevance to the case. That's why experts are invited to list their qualifications and work history at the start of their testimony. It's especially important where experts are asked to give expert opinions that are inferred from actual evidence. However, ultimately - as I and others have said numerous times - in the case of the Kercher-related forensics, it's the work practices of the "expert" that are far more important than any opinion she might hold, meaning that any discussion of her qualifications is of a lower relevance (but is still, in my opinion, of some limited relevance and importance)

 

[Mary_H]

Acceptance of apology appreciated

Now, what is this I'm reading about extremely fetid people?

 

[acbytesla]

Did you tell her you'd hurt your arm and needed some help getting a bulky item into your car?

(Is that in too bad taste?! Anyone?!)

Yes, that is in pretty bad taste,,,but then again, so would the movie Silence of the Lambs. But I don't think it was meant to be a joke in Silence. What is amazing about Bundy is that he was committing his killing spree in this method, but he wasn't driving a van. (he was being energy conscious and driving VW Beetle).

But yes, people - especially those with personality disorders - can be extremely adept at putting on different "masks" in different situations and with different people. We all do this to some degree: we would, I suspect, act and behave markedly differently around a) the CEO of the company we work for; b) our parents; c) our closest friends on a night out.

Compartmentalization.

The more extreme psychopaths can even deceive their husbands/wives/lovers, even when those partners are intelligent, curious people. For example (and I don't know the case well enough to be sure), I don't think that Dennis Rader's (BTK's) wife ever had any idea about his criminal alter ego.

Gary Ridgeway too. But I think she was always a bit concerned about him.

I do love how they caught Dennis Rader. He was a bit too cocky for his own good.

 

[acbytesla]

In any case, Knox's academic credentials are of absolutely no relevance to the case. It wouldn't make a jot of difference if she was a school drop-out at 14 or whether she had won some sort of "US University Scholar of the Year" award. Yes, her academic achievements speak somewhat to her character, but then extremely feted people have sometimes done unspeakably bad acts. All that matters is the actual evidence in the case indicating Knox's involvement in the murder - of which, I would argue, there is none that is credible or reliable.

On the other hand, the academic credentials of an expert witness ARE of some relevance to the case. That's why experts are invited to list their qualifications and work history at the start of their testimony. It's especially important where experts are asked to give expert opinions that are inferred from actual evidence. However, ultimately - as I and others have said numerous times - in the case of the Kercher-related forensics, it's the work practices of the "expert" that are far more important than any opinion she might hold, meaning that any discussion of her qualifications is of a lower relevance (but is still, in my opinion, of some limited relevance and importance)

I think more important than her scholarly endeavors is the fact that it seems as if Amanda had lots of friends and no one who knew Amanda in Seattle had a bad word to say about her.

 

[LondonJohn]

I agree, I think that she got caught up with providing the evidence needed, to prove the guilt of people she had been told the police knew were guilty. She lost appropriate disinterest.

I previusly raised the question about her training in forensic science. All this reinforces that she may not be a trained forensic scientist. She seems not to keep the scrupulous records required. She does not appear to know how to handle evidence appropriately, viz wrapping paper and mop, poor storage of bra clasp. I suspect going to a crime scene was not part of her job description. It was commented that the initial crime scene investigation was done better than the second when Stefanoni was leading? it.

I suspect that she was a lab geek, got the offer of a field trip and then found herself out of her depth. She did not have the correct sample bags enough gloves and tweezers, the correct record forms. She lost her independence, got caught up with the police myth and tried to wing it.

If I remember correctly, didn't Mignini specifically summon Stefanoni from Rome to process the crime scene (she was his *ahem* "favourite")? And if I remember correctly, wasn't this non-standard protocol?

There is no possibility that Perugia will not have its own suitably-qualified scene-of-crime officials. After all, crime is investigated in Perugia every single day. Houses get broken into and things get stolen, people get assaulted, sexual assaults take place, serious car accidents occur. All of these things (and many more) require crime scene investigators to identify, photograph, record, collect and transport forensic evidence. It's obviously inconceivable that the Perugia police would call in a scene-of-crime team from Rome for even a small proportion of these sorts of crimes.

I suspect that one explanation for Mignini's actions in calling in Stefanoni may lie in the fact that most serious crime in Italy is investigated by the Carabinieri. In fact, had it not been for the coincidental fact that the state police (in the form of the Postal Police) had arrived first, and had quickly established a clear operational command of the crime scene, it's very highly likely that this case would have been assigned to the far more experienced (and far more competent...) Carabinieri. I suspect therefore that once Mignini knew that the this crime had to be investigated under the State Police, he decided that - given the gravity and obvious high profile of the case - he didn't want to leave any of the forensics in the hands of the locals.

But ironically, by calling in his "favourite" Stefanoni - thereby bypassing the usual local crime-scene investigation personnel - he probably made things far worse rather than better.

 

[LondonJohn]

One of the things that got me angry about this is the sexist view of many posters. Women have sex, get over it. As has been said she seems no different from most college students. In my personal experience, women going off abroad on sandwich years take advantage of a certain anonymity.

I look at the comments about AK sex life, and I think swap this for a guy would anyone have said this? Secondly so what? Actually all this proves is she was singularly vanilla. At first opportunity she settled down with a sweet guy.

One of the reasons that there may be few women is that we find these discussions offensive.

I would hope that most men participating in the Knox/Sollecito/Kercher debate on this particular forum are similarly appalled by the overtly sexist discussions elsewhere by some (almost all of whom are either pro-guilt commentators or rapacious journalists (or both...)) which somehow seek to attach guilty significance to Knox's sex life and sexual history. Personally, I most certainly am appalled.

I think (hope) that nearly all of the discussion here on this issue is firmly in line with your - and my - point of view: Knox had a normal, healthy sex life for someone of her age and life experiences, and it's ludicrous and sexist to suggest otherwise, let alone to suggest that it's in any way a moral failing or even some sort of pointer to guilt. And if anyone tries to make that link here, I think (hope) that they are forcefully rebutted.

I think the lack of action by Italian authorities to appropriately investigate issues raised by this case is scandalous. The false HIV test and leaking of sexual history should be investigated. False negative tests with HIV are incredibly rare, so this must have been a lie. The normal process is a screening test is done on the first blood test, this does have a rate of false negatives, if the first test is positive a second test would be performed on the same blood sample that is highly specific. Only if both tests were positive would a presumptive positive report be reported and a second blood test requested, (catches mislabelled samples). In the UK the doctor / nurse involved would almost certainly have been struck off.

You're absolutely correct. I and many others have voiced exactly the same view here in the past.

 

[acbytesla]

One of the things that got me angry about this is the sexist view of many posters. Women have sex, get over it. As has been said she seems no different from most college students. In my personal experience, women going off abroad on sandwich years take advantage of a certain anonymity.

I look at the comments about AK sex life, and I think swap this for a guy would anyone have said this? Secondly so what? Actually all this proves is she was singularly vanilla. At first opportunity she settled down with a sweet guy.

I'm with LJ on this.

I've always thought that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. One of the things that has appalled me in this case is the misogyny, sexism and the idea of a woman having a healthy interest in sex is somehow wrong. In fact maybe more than anything it has been the ability to slap the guys around who do this has kept me interested in this case.

I know I was interested in sex when I was 20. Why wouldn't a girl of 20 be as well?

In some ways it bothers me that people defend her trying to minimize Amanda's sexual behavior. I get why they do it. Even today, a lot of people are uncomfortable with 20 year old girls having sex. But that is their problem, not Amanda's. Whether Amanda's sexual appetite was voracious or nonexistent is totally irrelevant and shouldn't have any role in this murder case.

But of course the Italians made this about Amanda's sex life and the whole world jumped into this silly meme.

In a way, I'd like to think I have not just Amanda's, but women's back in this fight. (Probably a bit of an exaggeration) but that's how I feel. I really want to do is attack the world for acting like morons transplanted from another century.

 

[andreajo]

A difference in what? No, there is no difference. Fudging data is a violation of scientific ethics. The end does not justify the means -- or make an ethics violation less of a moral transgression.

I imagine Stefanoni remains convinced that AK and RS are guilty. I further imagine she's never really studied the facts of the case -- or made an effort to distinguish fact from fiction + feeling.

If that last sentence sounds arrogant, all I can say is that IS my view of guilters. Their judgements are colored by belief in things that simply did not happen-- and/or by strong feelings about issues that have no bearing on guilt or innocence.

It would take a great deal of bravery for someone in Ms. Stefanoni's position (or even Machiavelli's position) to consider, even to themselves, that they have been mistaken in their belief in the guilt of Knox and Sollecito.

Stefanoni would have to look at her own actions in an entirely new and extremely unflattering light. The only way that she can justify her sloppiness and possible fudging is to believe with all her heart that it was done in the noble cause of convicting two murderers. To protect her belief in herself as a professional and good person, she must do whatever mental gymnastics are required to cling to the belief that Amanda and Raffaele killed Meredith.

I'd be very surprised if she could ever come to believe that RS and AK are innocent. If she did, and took steps to clear the air, I'd be prepared to accord her some measure of respect.

 

[js202]

I wrote a comment this morning stating my belief that Stefanoni falsified testing and test interpretations of the material alleged to be Meredith's DNA on the knife blade and later planted Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp. So you see, I bring a critical eye to this. But I want to say I do not agree with the comment above that Stefanoni "knowingly contributed to constructing a pitiful flimsy case against two innocents". I believe Stefanoni believed Knox and Sollicito were guilty, and the evidence she was fabricating was against two guilty people . She was just helping frame two guilty people. There is a difference between framing two innocent people and framing what she believes to be two guilty people.

Which brings me to the next question: What does Stefanoni now believe? Does she now believe the defendants against whom she falsified evidence are innocent or does she still believe they are guilty?

Fair enough. But, even more precisely, I think mostly she got caught up in the zeitgeist. Her superiors at least *exuded* singular confidence that AK and RS were guilty.

There have been compelling ruminations here and elsewhere as to whether, once the case against Lumumba fell apart, say, such confidence was based more on saving face than on an actual administration of justice. Then other evidence became more difficult to find and trump up. I doubt Stefanoni was unaware of such vicissitudes. I think she went along to get along.

 

[andreajo]

I have a feeling Italians do not have a phrase for "conflict of interest."

No kidding! I was flabbergasted that representatives for Patrick Lumumba and the Kercher family were allowed to participate in the part of the court process where guilt was being decided. They have lawsuits pending, and stand to gain financially if AK and RS are convicted.

 

[Bill Williams]

One of the things that got me angry about this is the sexist view of many posters. Women have sex, get over it. As has been said she seems no different from most college students. In my personal experience, women going off abroad on sandwich years take advantage of a certain anonymity.

I look at the comments about AK sex life, and I think swap this for a guy would anyone have said this? Secondly so what? Actually all this proves is she was singularly vanilla. At first opportunity she settled down with a sweet guy.

One of the reasons that there may be few women is that we find these discussions offensive.

I would hope that most men participating in the Knox/Sollecito/Kercher debate on this particular forum are similarly appalled by the overtly sexist discussions elsewhere by some (almost all of whom are either pro-guilt commentators or rapacious journalists (or both...)) which somehow seek to attach guilty significance to Knox's sex life and sexual history. Personally, I most certainly am appalled.

I think (hope) that nearly all of the discussion here on this issue is firmly in line with your - and my - point of view: Knox had a normal, healthy sex life for someone of her age and life experiences, and it's ludicrous and sexist to suggest otherwise, let alone to suggest that it's in any way a moral failing or even some sort of pointer to guilt. And if anyone tries to make that link here, I think (hope) that they are forcefully rebutted.

I think the lack of action by Italian authorities to appropriately investigate issues raised by this case is scandalous. The false HIV test and leaking of sexual history should be investigated. False negative tests with HIV are incredibly rare, so this must have been a lie. The normal process is a screening test is done on the first blood test, this does have a rate of false negatives, if the first test is positive a second test would be performed on the same blood sample that is highly specific. Only if both tests were positive would a presumptive positive report be reported and a second blood test requested, (catches mislabelled samples). In the UK the doctor / nurse involved would almost certainly have been struck off.

You're absolutely correct. I and many others have voiced exactly the same view here in the past.

Mary_H and others raise a critical point here; these are not a gender-neutral issues to do with what went off the rails in Perugia.

From Mignini's own assumptions about women's sexuality hidden deep within what to him was only the facade of an innocent face to that prison guard who is only now being held accountable for his harrassing behaviour, this issue is never far from things.

I am grateful that Mary_H keeps it front and centre... as a guy, I can wander off into other areas of discussion, thinking, "well we've seen to the 'gender' issue", and compartmentalize it inappropriately. Truth is - it's simply front and centre here... Even Napoleoni who herself is obviously trying to do her job as a woman in a "man's arena" colours this too... so that when Napoleoni sees a young Seattleite doing yoga to deal with the stress of having a friend murdered; even Napoleoni inappropriately sexualizes THAT!

This is the ground zero of, "We solved this case through careful study of behaviour even before the forensic evidence came in."

For the men investigating this, or even Napoleoni, part of the issue of failing to backtrack once the forensics DID come in....

Is the inner-guilt (awareness) that one had been inappropriately sexualizing this to begin with. Not being able to admit that (especially to the group of partner investigators) is one of the reasons they pressed on through charges, trial and conviction.

All because they could not admit to their own inappropriate sexualizing of this, where anything other than Rudy's own sense of sexual entitlement had nothing to do with this.

My own confession is that I do need people to call me back to the issue of gender-bias which is and always been at the heart of this.

I can get lost in other issues - like why machiavelli gives a free pass to two people in this and only two people Giuliano and Andrea - I've gone on at that ad naseum! - and why he will throw almost everyone else under a bus if need be.....

 

[Bill Williams]

I have a feeling Italians do not have a phrase for "conflict of interest."

No kidding! I was flabbergasted that representatives for Patrick Lumumba and the Kercher family were allowed to participate in the part of the court process where guilt was being decided. They have lawsuits pending, and stand to gain financially if AK and RS are convicted.

Have you seen the recent stuf which suggests that if victims cannot get their cash awards from the convicted, that they can sue the Italian government to get access to funds? It explains Maresca.... he knows that convicted criminals rarely can pay off the enormous cash awards made.... he probably thinks the people of Italy are going to, in the end, pay him off!

 

[MDDVS]

Have you seen the recent stuf which suggests that if victims cannot get their cash awards from the convicted, that they can sue the Italian government to get access to funds? It explains Maresca.... he knows that convicted criminals rarely can pay off the enormous cash awards made.... he probably thinks the people of Italy are going to, in the end, pay him off!

Hello, do you have a source for this? It is very interesting.

 

[Machiavelli]

That is an old meme that is often repeated. Is there evidence to back it up such as more phone records? Or is it just more crap.

There has been a trial. And there are news reports about it.

 

[Machiavelli]

It is quite interesting how Machiavelli is willing to post pretty much every unsubstantiated and usually false slander of Amanda and at the same time come to defend and deny pretty much proven facts about Mignini and Stefanoni..
(...)

False? Actually, it's just the truth.

 

[Machiavelli]

Who was he? What is his name? What kind of drugs was he dealing?

Look, I don't recall his name (their names, actually, since it was a trial against three drug dealers), but I know his attorneys. He dealt with cocaine.

 

[Machiavelli]

]Fines, plural? :

Yes, plural. Because, maybe it's wrong in English, but in Italian we use plural in sentences when a single case is taken as sample case.

Um . . . this is an odd way to describe a very common junior year practice here in the USA, which we usually refer to as studying abroad.

When you go to study at university.
But if you are not studying a university course, you can't be a honor student. Elementary.

Again, you: . . . you make a claim, you word such claim as if it was a fact (...)

And it is. It's also what Knox write in her book btw.

People do leave jobs that aren't a good fit, and smart people leave them right away. What were you suggesting, I wonder?

I don’t suggest, I talk plainly: Knox left a job at the Bundestag after one day of work, which left her uncle dismayed. That was a very prestigious post for a 20 year old, a job he had struggled to manage to get her. She drifted away after one day, and she admitted she staged with her uncle (crying etc.) basically she manipulated his feelings so that he wouldn’t create further problems. It’s not a suggestion, is a fact; something she wrote herself.

Now that's just silly. She enrolled through a University of Washington program before she left . . . are you deviously suggesting that she just randomly went to Perugia because it was a known party town? That would be sort of like making a claim as if it were a fact with no interest in its actual truth.

Yes I am suggesting she went to Peruga because she knew it was a party town (somethinh is widely known in Europe, and that we can reasonably infer she knew about from exchange students accounts, since Perugia was twinned with Seattle , and she chose Perugia also because there was a ‘university’ (the University of Foreigneers) which she could attend without any academic arrangement. Something she could not easily do elsewhere.

And yet he didn't fire her. Look at devious you, suggesting defamatory propaganda.

But he changed her tasks, he sent her outside his pub to give leaflets. I am in fact correctly reporting sources: Lumumba himself made such declarations about Amanda, and the fact that he didn’t fire her (yet) does not make these facts go away. So they are facts not propaganda. Moreover, a bit of a context: this is Italy, here you don’t fire people from job in one day. Bosses operate much more cuatiously here.

And here I've been under the impression that you were such a strictly logical man. How do you know she gave her number to him? Has no one ever passed along a phone number to another person? Does your phone not have a "share" button on the contact list?

The fact is that she had his number and he had hers. They also had telephone contacts. Whatever you like to make up about it, these are the facts. If you are saying they got each other’s number through their agents…

Yes, because that would be wrong! For all you know, she got a call from a number she didn't recognize and called it back to see who was bothering her. But that wouldn't forward the agenda of making defamatory claims as if they were fact.

I think it’s quite the other way round: she called first, then he called back. But it doesn’t matter anyway. Everybody has the right to think whatever they want about those phone contacts. Fact is she had phone numbers of drug dealers (indefinite Italian plural, which can well refer to one single case), a drug dealer had her phone number , she had contacts with a drug dealer. I don’t have phone numbers of drug dealers so it’s not me the person who may be asked to give explanations about it. Those are factual elements, and everybody is allowed to take these element in account when they draw scenarios about Amanda Knox.

PS: you may also not forget that she recalls about this "beautiful" black men that she met in Perugia, at a bar in Via Garibaldi. To whom she promised they would meet again when she would be back from Germany. And, that she never revealed the name of this black man, whose identity was never discovered.
You may also take in account that Rudy Guede would spend his afternoons at the basketball court in Piazza Grimana, the centre of which is 60 meters distant from the University of Foreigneers' gate, and 96 meters distant from the apartment house-door where Knox lived. And it located exactly between the two places, on the way Amanda walked every day back and forth several times to attend classes. And don't forget Rudy explained he was sexually attracted by Knox, as all testimonies confirmed, and Amanda admitted she knew him for time before she knew Guede.
Let's say it's a number a coincidences. But don't forget about them.

 

[Bill Williams]

That is an old meme that is often repeated. Is there evidence to back it up such as more phone records? Or is it just more crap.

There has been a trial. And there are news reports about it.

Machiavelli if nothing is not inconsistent. Then again, consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, so Machiavelli now seems a tad more human for having these visible failings...

Who was he? What is his name? What kind of drugs was he dealing?

Look, I don't recall his name (their names, actually, since it was a trial against three drug dealers), but I know his attorneys. He dealt with cocaine.

The info might be in your stuff - you know, the transcripts of hearings where you say it's proven Mignini never put forward a Satanic Rite theory.... and perhaps your drafts of posts related to Guede and Knox having a prostitute/pimp relationship.... or was that simply that Knox was a party girl who traded sex for drugs? I keep forgetting what you're pushing next about this...

 

[Bill Williams]

PS: you may also not forget that she recalls about this "beautiful" black men that she met in Perugia, at a bar in Via Garibaldi. To whom she promised they would meet again when she would be back from Germany. And, that she never revealed the name of this black man, whose identity was never discovered.
You may also take in account that Rudy Guede would spend his afternoons at the basketball court in Piazza Grimana, the centre of which is 60 meters distant from the University of Foreigneers' gate, and 96 meters distant from the apartment house-door where Knox lived. And it located exactly between the two places, on the way Amanda walked every day back and forth several times to attend classes. And don't forget Rudy explained he was sexually attracted by Knox, as all testimonies confirmed, and Amanda admitted she knew him for time before she knew Guede.
Let's say it's a number a coincidences. But don't forget about them.

More of Machiavelli's methodology. He never misses an opportunity to make a startlingly remote claim about Knox, all with the agenda of vilifying her.

Yet, Andrea Vogt gets a free pass.

Giuliano Mignini gets a free pass.

Machiavelli defends Stefanoni like stink.... calling people criminals for doubting that she's a real "Dr."

Keep posting.

 

[Bill Williams]

Hello, do you have a source for this? It is very interesting.

Ack - I will look.... someone else may have the source... help!