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

[Machiavelli]

Interesting. What did the autopsy report tell you about Amanda's role in the murder?

The autopsy (always to be crossed with other documents) tells me that there must be more than one perpetrator.
It's the most important thing.

The autopsy also reveals that Meredith was stabbed on the left with a knife which had a large blade.

The documents also show that Meredith was kneeling and facing the wall or the wardrobe, and the person who gave the fatal blow was between her and the bed. But someone else was holding her.

If you put together this with the fact that the metal clasp was forcedly deformed by Sollecito, the strap was cut with a small blade, it was cut before she received the first stabbing on the right but not removed, and a small knife poked her on her right, you have Sollecito's role.

In order to hold a large knife you need Amanda Knox. The person who stabbed her on the left side had not cut the bra (but the bra had been cut already), and the person who cut the bra is not Knox.
The person holding her wirst was Guede, he also committed a sexual violence usinge one hand, and another hand was pressed on her mouth.
There is also a number of other previous actions which require further hands (removing her clothes). In this system, Knox needs to be consistently placed on the murder scene playing an active role in this action. She is the one who was holding one big knife. The other two perpetrators are doing different things, they didn't give the left knife blow.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

a poor track record of guarding civil liberties

A question for you or for anyone, concerning a court appearance by Amanda. Could Amanda have gone to Italy and spoken before the court (as Raffaele did) without fear of her being detained and not allowed to leave to go back to the states?

IMO their detention in 2007-2008 for eleven months violated a number of principles that liberal democracies must guard carefully (see Benjamin Sayagh's aritcle "Arrested Abroad" for some of them). There is a track record, in other words. John Douglas and Mark Olshaker wrote, "And how about the fact that she would risk long years of imprisonment for a crime she demonstrably did not commit, were she to return to the country that falsely charged and imprisoned her in the first place. Would you let your daughter go back under similar circumstances?" I wouldn't. It's a no-brainer.

 

[Machiavelli]

But lack of fear might not be limited to innocents?

Well, innocents or fools. Really crazy people can actually be be with no fear.

 

[Machiavelli]

Sure, nothing personal, because she is a complete stranger to you, and you are anonymous. You can attack without fear of retaliation. Nobody can scrutinize your correspondence, your personal diaries, or your relationships with other people, because nobody knows who you are. And if anyone draws character inferences from your sleazy commentary, you can whine to the mods.

No, it's not that I can, it's not a choice: I must call the mods, because otherwise I would have to answer, and that would be a breaking of the rules.

 

[Diocletus]

The autopsy (always to be crossed with other documents) tells me that there must be more than one perpetrator.
It's the most important thing.

Really? 7 out of 8 pathologists said that the autopsy didn't tell them what you say it tells you. And that tells me that you don't have a clue in the world what you're talking about.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I like the reaction to the judge about the spontaneous letter/email from Amanda. He was skeptical that she was its author.

Me, I don't think she's a psychopath (her words).

Let the fun and games begin in that Italian court.
Entertainment, just as with Italian politics.

 

[Diocletus]

I think it's clear Nencini didn't like the thing. But actually what I've I noticed is that it is, specifically what Carlo Dalla Vedova does that irks Nencini or looks like an own goal.
Nencini pointd his finger at Dalla Vedova basically, saying "you are attributing these declarations to the defendant", and called this "irrituale".

It's so funny these silly rules that these Italian courts make up and then don't follow. Maresca throws in all sorts of after-the-fact evidence not admitted at trial (he talks about book deals and websites). Police officers talk about interviews they conducted and then opine that the interviewee was lying. But when someone who has already testified submits a letter, they criticize them.

That said, the letter did come in.

 

[RandyN]

I'm not sure she was given or took the advice she needed.

The phrase subjugated to psychological torture makes no sense to me. Could it be that they translated from Italian to English? I would have had her change it to subjected.

She may not be absolutely stupid but she does seem to think that "her voice" will win the day. Does anybody think that The "All you need is Love" sweatshirt was recommended by the lawyers?

Nope...I think Amandas sister brought her that shirt to wear because it was Valentines Day. Full stop.

I don't think her lawyers ever showed the acumen to defend her against this ridiculous case at any stage which should have been easily tossed out... let alone did they show the skill to advise her about her wardrobe or anything at all actually. So far Zanetti has been her best defense lawyer...cept he was a judge. These guys have been useless and out of their depth...although I repeat they are nice men who appear to care.

Meanwhile I am reminded how often nice guys finish last!

 

[Bill Williams]

I like the reaction to the judge about the spontaneous letter/email from Amanda. He was skeptical that she was its author.

Me, I don't think she's a psychopath (her words).

Let the fun and games begin in that Italian court.
Entertainment, just as with Italian politics.

I'm not sure that's correct - Nencini is reported to have said that this kind of document is not a true substitute to an in-person spontaneous statement. The important thing is that he read it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Well, innocents or fools. Really crazy people can actually be be with no fear.

Are you all right?

 

[RandyN]

No, it's not that I can, it's not a choice: I must call the mods, because otherwise I would have to answer, and that would be a breaking of the rules.

LOL... just like Mignini had no choice in filing dozens of sub-related cases against anyone who looked at him or his ridiculous case crookedly. Except of course when it better served his purpose to not do so, then, he switched rules and did not file (like with Lumumba's "slander" of Perugia police)which is exactly what, who, and how he and others make a mockery of your Italian Judicial system. He comes into court as a fool with only foolish unfounded claims and your court accepts his nonsense unquestionably which can only serve to make your whole process... your courts and your laws a circus... only one with just a clown show...nothing more at all.

From the bottom right to the very top and your fools did it in the open for all the world to see and review and study. Good luck with that.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

an anomalous laboratory results

I like the reaction to the judge about the spontaneous letter/email from Amanda. He was skeptical that she was its author.

Me, I don't think she's a psychopath (her words).

Let the fun and games begin in that Italian court.
Entertainment, just as with Italian politics.

Darth Rotor,

Good to see you posting here again. The Nencini court rejected most of the defense requests but did go forward with some of the prosecution's requests, particularly with respect to the DNA. The DNA evidence that was then produced (Amanda's DNA being present) actually strengthens the case that the 2007 result with respect to the knife was an anomaly of some kind. Given these circumstances, Nencini cannot now logically convict without people asking whether there was any chance of his court acquitting the pair.

Now that I got that out of my system, we can talk about the Italian judicial system as it actually exists.

 

[Poppy1016]

I never read tabloids. But, going back to 2008 and 2009, I recall Amanda Knox's testimony turned my opinion -still with some doubts, ignoring the evidence - towards a powerful perception of guilt.
Now, through her later, subsequent declarations, she - Sollecito's as well - conveys to me the worse possible perceptions about her being guilty and about her personality.
Not only she is proven guilty as for the evidence, she also appears to me as guilty person in the most spectacular way. About everything she says and communicates, to me its speaks about lies.

You are correct about her being somehow different from what I expected. When I saw her in person I was surprised. Then when I saw her in media appearances I was even more surprised. But I was stunned because she appeared to me far worse than what I expected.
She conveyes basically two things to me: her being a liar, and her being a narcissist. Almost everything she says appears to me as a lie.
I did not expect her to convey a negative impression to me up to this point.

Everything YOU say,to me speaks about lies.

 

[Poppy1016]

The sole reason this appeal takes place is that Knox and Sollecito appealed their conviction.

There has been no acquittal. There has been no appeal that was accomplished yet. The appeal that has taken place under the ruling of Pratillo Hellmann-Zanetti was illegitimate and invalid.

Everything you post here is illegitimate,unproven,and invalid.

 

[Poppy1016]

You can only find one Italian source which says "saxual rite".
But I can point out court documents that do say something else which is totally different and rules it out.
It's not that I am just asking to cite court evidence: I actually pointed to court documents which is evidence of the contrary.



Meredith's girl friends testified about a rather non-idyllic picture.



Let's say that it was the others (Meredith, friends, flatmates) who perceived some bizzarre, odd, and annoying behaviours on the part of Amanda, in areas such as cleaning and on relational aspects.



Well he expressed his ideas with his friends, but also in his interrogation by the prosecutor.



Yes that's what he did.
It's actualy one reason more to think that he may have hung out with Amanda as well, and that it was unlikely that he had any urge to assail and rape Meredith.



Well we could start with the prosecution arguments at his 2008 trial. But whetner he "traded drug for sex" seems totally irrelevant to me.
Even the concept of "trading in exchange of sex" seems to me something extremely elusive: even Berlusconi used to have sex with many girls, in something that was a "trade" in general terms, but often without "trading" anything specific that you could put in relation with an episode. I won't investigate into that sort of things. I am not interested actually in filling check boxes about all personal motivations why people have sex on a certain day - did you do that for that..? I just think if you are a woman who decides to spend a night with Guede, a bit of cocaine might be, let's say, part of the "pacakge" for the evening fun in some way. It might be or may be not. And I am not interested in investigating about "tradings".

Do you have access to the information contained in Guede's interrogation? Was it recorded?

 

[RandyN]

Then why don't they drop him? No, he is the only alleged witness to the kids not being at Raf's. The prosecution has in no way proved the alibis to be false.

Who cares where RS and AK are not?...A strong case can be and should have been made that Toto provides incontestable proof that AK and RS were indeed in the square from around 9:30 until midnight on the night of the murder. Forget alibi...this is proof beyond all doubt that MK had to be murdered by someone else...(I wonder who that might be? Heck it may have even been Guede with the assistance of that crazy olive tossing Albanian Kokomaniac and the cross dressers brother all acting in concert. No matter since what is certain is that Toto provides a perfect alibi for both RS and AK for the time of the murder...TOD which is backed by Nara, Mignini, pathologist, other ear witnesses, other clowns from the freak show in Italy...

9 til midnight! What?

Could be Guede, Koko and the missing brother...but CAN NOT be RS or AK. Why is this so hard?

 

[Poppy1016]

You need to be innocent in order to be "without fear".

Yes I acknowledge it's a rethorical answer. But I really think Knox can't be "without fear" ever, even when she is in the US.
The only way to live without fear is to confess.

This somehow doesn't seem exactly like the way Mach usually words things . Or is it just me?

 

[moodstream]

Consider the possibility that they may be right, and you might be mistaken.

Clearly, you have some other Machiavelli in mind.

 

[moodstream]

And Amanda's email was admitted to the court file, correct?

A question for you or for anyone, concerning a court appearance by Amanda. Could Amanda have gone to Italy and spoken before the court (as Raffaele did) without fear of her being detained and not allowed to leave to go back to the states?

Aside from the cost of travel and accommodations how would an appearance before the court have benefitted or not benefitted Amanda?

Good question. I have wondered if she could work out with the court/government to assure free passage for the purpose of testifying.

 

[js202]

But I know many girls. Even known few North American ones. Actually, young women from North America they don't make that negative impression to me.
Actually, I recall only one woman from North America who made a comparable negative impression on me, and even more to a number of people who were working with me; maybe it's irony but that woman was a Canadian (no offence; I had a Canadian neighbour who was a very nice young guy).
I recall that woman, a narcissist, a sociopath, really an extremely negative charachter.
Acutally that woman, despite she was beautiful, I found her physically repulsive, on chemical grounds: I could not stand her odour. There was something wrong. An immediate alarm bell. The first negative message was physical, from molecules.

I obviously happened to know some other more ore less sick or disturbing individuale, probably most individuals I felt as disturbed tend to be men but I can think about several even if we speak about women. And anyway, "disturbs" are not the same, personalities are obviously very different from each other. I mean know superficially; mostly don't happen to know that kind of disturbed women closely, they are not part of my everyday life, but anyway I observe people a lot, and I happen to know a lot about several let's say "psychiatric" life situations.

This is some of the most bizarre and warped commentary I have ever had the discomfort to encounter, by the written word or in person. The only sense to be made from it is that it is emblematic of a certain approach to this case, along with the presumption that its exponents are likely somewhat less reliably correct than a broken clock.