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

Status
Not open for further replies.
-

Grinder said:
Totally agree and think that going after them as GB did was the most important single point to fight.

I would have tried to get De Felice on the stand to explain what he meant by the famous 'she told us what we knew to be correct after we mad eher buckle' ? I would have spent about 25% of my effort on that. I would have given a lot of effort to showing that the evidence was only compatible and that without the prior assumption of guilt that evidence isn't evidence at all. I would have shown the video of rock climber.
Click to expand...
-

I had to pick myself up off the floor after that one.

I agree totally, I'd like to know also what they meant, but isn't she up for slander soon? Her parents? Or is that settled? They might be thinking (wrongfully I think) to save all that for the slander trial. One way to fight slander is to to prove it's true.

But yeah the video too. I agree with a lot of the people here that what the ISC ordered has not happened. I think the Kerchers are right, test and look at everything again,

d

-
 
Last edited:
yimyammer said:
Given the logic displayed by the powers that be in Italy, isn't that a valid concern?
Click to expand...

They have all had serious issues, but our recognition of that has never stopped them from being able to exercise their temporal powers.
 
AmyStrange said:
-
I had to pick myself up off the floor after that one.

I agree totally, I'd like to know also what they meant, but isn't she up for slander soon? Her parents? Or is that settled? They might be thinking (wrongfully I think) to save all that for the slander trial. One way to fight slander is to to prove it's true.

But yeah the video too. I agree with a lot of the people here that what the ISC ordered has not happened. I think the Kerchers are right, test and look at everything again,

d
-
Click to expand...

Stop it ! :p

She and her parents still face something like defamation for saying that the investigators hit her during the interrogation.

I don't think that trial will amount to a hill of beans in comparison with this trial. winning that one will too little too late.
 
Bill Williams said:
The trouble is, without the video or transcript of the interrogation, they cannot be regarded, really, as confessions.

First is the self-confessed role of Anna Donnini, who said she acted as a mediator, because on her arrival the interrogation was in chaos. And why not - Ficarra spoke no English, Knox spoke broken Italian.

What Knox needed was both a translator AND lawyer, so that she could understand that her confused, exhausted imaginings could be used against her.

Key is that nothing she "confessed" to was true. Guilters see that as cunning... really? In truth the whole session is a classic episode of false confession.... what Knox confessed to was being confused and not knowing.

Then the typed something up in perfect Italian legalese and she signed it. If she'd had a lawyer, the lawyer would never have allowed that, which was the point of depriving her of one.
Click to expand...

What happened in the interrogation stinks to high heaven. During the interrogations, Amanda and Raffaele were not officially told they were suspects, they were denied access to lawyers, the interrogations were not taped and the police relied on coerced confessions. Why did the police havd to rely on such underhand and dubious tactics if they had a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele?
 
Last edited:
Amy and Grinder,
With respect, I disagree with your assessment of Raffaele as a hero for not turning on Amanda, and I was not that comfortable with the title of Raff's book either.
Look, I respect that Raff has approached his ordeal with strength and dignity. I think he is a decent human being. It must have been horrible to face pressure from his family to 'turn' on Amanda.
But I don't think doing the right thing, doing his duty as a fellow human being should be necessarily considered heroic.
Plus, the omly way for Raff to extricate himself from this nightmare, morally and legally, was to tell the truth.
Finally, he does have to remember that without his confusion on the night of the 5th, Amanda woukd probably not have believed the police lies. I'm not blaming him, I'm just saying.
 
Grinder said:
I would have shown the video of rock climber.
Click to expand...

Suppose a TV station in Florence were to broadcast the video of the climber going in the window. Or it was broadcase as a paid or free advertising spot. Suppose it was projected against a building wall in the town square in front of the court house for all the world to see. Suppose advertising trucks drive around downtown Florence for 3 days straight showing the video from giant screens. Think the townspeople will take notice?
 
bri1 said:
Amy and Grinder,
With respect, I disagree with your assessment of Raffaele as a hero for not turning on Amanda, and I was not that comfortable with the title of Raff's book either.
Look, I respect that Raff has approached his ordeal with strength and dignity. I think he is a decent human being. It must have been horrible to face pressure from his family to 'turn' on Amanda.
But I don't think doing the right thing, doing his duty as a fellow human being should be necessarily considered heroic.
Plus, the omly way for Raff to extricate himself from this nightmare, morally and legally, was to tell the truth.
Finally, he does have to remember that without his confusion on the night of the 5th, Amanda woukd probably not have believed the police lies. I'm not blaming him, I'm just saying.
Click to expand...

The police had Amanda in one interrogation room and Raffaele in another. The police tag-team told Amanda that Raffaele she was not there the night of Nov 1 - that she had gone out, and that she had better fess up lady, had better remember where you were, or we will put you in jail for 30 years and you will never see your family again! That is what they basically told her - and they didn't say "now, let's take a 5 minute break so you can go down the hall and ask Raffaele if what we have just shouted at you is all true."

Steve Moore was very clear about interrogation techniques. When you want accurate information, you want your suspect to be clear and lucid. When you want to obtain statements to support your preconceived scenario, you want them confused and disoriented.
 
Strozzi said:
The police had Amanda in one interrogation room and Raffaele in another. The police tag-team told Amanda that Raffaele she was not there the night of Nov 1 - that she had gone out, and that she had better fess up lady, had better remember where you were, or we will put you in jail for 30 years and you will never see your family again! That is what they basically told her - and they didn't say "now, let's take a 5 minute break so you can go down the hall and ask Raffaele if what we have just shouted at you is all true."

Steve Moore was very clear about interrogation techniques. When you want accurate information, you want your suspect to be clear and lucid. When you want to obtain statements to support your preconceived scenario, you want them confused and disoriented.
Click to expand...

It is important to bear in mind a tactic corrupt police officers often use is to play suspects off against each other.
 
projection

Strozzi said:
Suppose a TV station in Florence were to broadcast the video of the climber going in the window. Or it was broadcase as a paid or free advertising spot. Suppose it was projected against a building wall in the town square in front of the court house for all the world to see. Suppose advertising trucks drive around downtown Florence for 3 days straight showing the video from giant screens. Think the townspeople will take notice?
Click to expand...
IMO you are on a roll. That is the best idea I have heard about this case in quite some time.
 
-

bri1 said:
Amy and Grinder,
With respect, I disagree with your assessment of Raffaele as a hero for not turning on Amanda, and I was not that comfortable with the title of Raff's book either.
Look, I respect that Raff has approached his ordeal with strength and dignity. I think he is a decent human being. It must have been horrible to face pressure from his family to 'turn' on Amanda.
But I don't think doing the right thing, doing his duty as a fellow human being should be necessarily considered heroic.
Plus, the omly way for Raff to extricate himself from this nightmare, morally and legally, was to tell the truth.
Finally, he does have to remember that without his confusion on the night of the 5th, Amanda woukd probably not have believed the police lies. I'm not blaming him, I'm just saying.
Click to expand...
-

You have a point, but so what if he's a flawed hero. Those are even better,

d

-
 
Welshman said:
It is important to bear in mind a tactic corrupt police officers often use is to play suspects off against each other.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. It can also apply to getting the truth from some of a dozen different police who were involved in the interrogation. That is why I think a publisher should send a letter to each police officer and each officer's family members telling them that they are invited to meet with the publisher for one day of interview at the office of the publisher in Switzerland to tell their true account of what transpired and what the roles of the various officers and commanders were. Offer very significant incentive to be interviewed, with the knowledge that if you don't take the offer some of your fellow officers surely will (or already are). Don't be one of the last and miss out on the windfall of a lifetime, when several of your colleagues are already telling their story and getting paid hundreds of thousands of Euros. The book and movie rights to the true story of what transpired as told by officers who were there are worth millions, and a publisher should be able to advance the first million Euros for the blockbuster book and movie.

Police commanders can ask everyone involved "are you talking?", and nobody will be certain if some are or not - even if everyone contacted denies that they are. A few progress announcements from the publisher that " it's coming out - some are talking" will split the "blue wall of silence".
 
Last edited:
British Catholics pray for Amanda & Raffaele......

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2014/01/10/lets-pray-for-amanda-knox-and-rafaele-sollecito/

There is one thing worth bearing in mind: there is no trustworthy forensic evidence that puts either Knox or Sollecito in the room where the murder happened. The evidence on which they were convicted was an elaborate theory that Meredith Kercher was killed in as sex game that went wrong. At first there was mention of some sort of Satanic inspiration to this sex game, but that talk has long been abandoned by the prosecution.

We are no longer being asked to believe that Miss Knox is a witch, or that Sollecito was her dumb accomplice; but we are being asked to believe that Knox and Sollecito were the sort of people who had sex a quatre, where there is absolutely no hint of this in their previous histories. Indeed, it is quite incredible that Sollecito, who had known Knox but a week, and who has never met Guede, the other supposed participant, should ever have indulged in such perversion, given his personal history; nor is there any reason at all to suppose Knox would have found a four handed sex game at all alluring.
Click to expand...
 
Strozzi, I'm not arguing with the coercive nature of the interrogations, and even if Raff had named Amanda in those circumstances I would not blame him any more than I blame Amanda for her statements implicating Lumumba. (Which is not at all).
I also resist any implication that being able to resist coercive and deceptive methods shows some kind of strength of character, or will, or any moral content.
However, I was under the impression that the idea was that Raff is a hero for not somehow 'throwing Amanda under the bus' since the initial interrogations. This is an exagerration. It is both decent and smart of him, but not heroic. MOO....
 
indeed

Welshman said:
What happened in the interrogation stinks to high heaven. During the interrogations, Amanda and Raffaele were not officially told they were suspects, they were denied access to lawyers, the interrogations were not taped and the police relied on coerced confessions. Why did the police havd to rely on such underhand and dubious tactics if they had a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele?
Click to expand...
I would have brought this up in my closing remarks. A good deal of evidence has emerged in the past few years that they walked into the station as suspects. The interrogations exemplify the GIGO principle. MOO.
 
Strozzi said:
Suppose a TV station in Florence were to broadcast the video of the climber going in the window. Or it was broadcase as a paid or free advertising spot. Suppose it was projected against a building wall in the town square in front of the court house for all the world to see. Suppose advertising trucks drive around downtown Florence for 3 days straight showing the video from giant screens. Think the townspeople will take notice?
Click to expand...


I'd settle for a promoted YouTube video. I've advocated for them to do a series covering all the major evidence on YT to reach everyone.

Funny that the same nameless PGP tweeters think doing a video is a joke but think their pestering the media is a great strategy.
 
-

bri1 said:
Strozzi, I'm not arguing with the coercive nature of the interrogations, and even if Raff had named Amanda in those circumstances I would not blame him any more than I blame Amanda for her statements implicating Lumumba. (Which is not at all).
I also resist any implication that being able to resist coercive and deceptive methods shows some kind of strength of character, or will, or any moral content.
However, I was under the impression that the idea was that Raff is a hero for not somehow 'throwing Amanda under the bus' since the initial interrogations. This is an exagerration. It is both decent and smart of him, but not heroic. MOO....
Click to expand...
-

Conflict and disagreements are the motherboard of all debate, court cases, and horse racing.

Only history will tell us who the winner of this one will really be,

d

-
 
bri1 said:
Strozzi, I'm not arguing with the coercive nature of the interrogations, and even if Raff had named Amanda in those circumstances I would not blame him any more than I blame Amanda for her statements implicating Lumumba. (Which is not at all).
I also resist any implication that being able to resist coercive and deceptive methods shows some kind of strength of character, or will, or any moral content.
However, I was under the impression that the idea was that Raff is a hero for not somehow 'throwing Amanda under the bus' since the initial interrogations. This is an exagerration. It is both decent and smart of him, but not heroic. MOO....
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to tell people how coercive the interrogation was, and sorry if my recent post wasn't clear enough. I was trying to underscore that Amanda had no way to verify (or doubt) what the police said Raff said, whether Raff actually said it or not. The police lied to her outright on various points in the interrogation and could have lied to her even more - could have made up anything and attributed it to Raff in order to get her to cave to their (erroneous) theory. Raff's confused version of events wasn't necessary to accuse, confuse, and disorient Amanda. The police could have done that all by themselves, and they did - as evidenced by the missing tapes.
 
Didn't Raffaele having a phone call coming in as well as a text? :/ I wonder what people think when they know that all 3 computers were fried? Not one, not two, but all three????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom