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

[Vibio]

I have posted before, using Follain as a source, that she exhibited a lot of behaviour that showed her to be stressed and concerned for others. Where did you get this 'description' of yours from?

Robin Butterworth testifying in court:

"I found Amanda's behavior very strange and I found it quite difficult to be around her"

"She said Knox and Sollecito fooled around as they waited.

"I remember Amanda sticking her tongue out at Raffaele," Butterworth said in English, her testimony translated for the court. "They were talking and joking, kissing and cuddling.""

Amy Frost, another witness who was also at the police station, said Knox "made faces," such as crossing her eyes and sticking her tongue out. She was "giggling" and kissing Sollecito, said Frost.

"She didn't show any sadness. She wasn't crying. She seemed quite angry and a bit frustrated and sometimes happy," said another one, Natalie Hayward."
--------------------

I know, I know... we all react to death differently... but gleeful? Someone's got problems...

 

[acbytesla]

On this you are plain wrong. I thoulgt I made it clear n the past as well; I say it now again: my assessment that Knox is a pathological narcissist is totally independent from my conclusion that she is guilty of murder.She would be a narcissist even if she were innocent - actually, she would be even more pathological and narcissist to my eyes if she were actually innocent (in that case part of her behaviour should be explained on pure pathological ground, instead of explaining it as logical behaviour consequent to being guilty).

Her pathological narcissism is - to me - something that stands out in a more immediate and obvious way than her guilt. I must say, I actually find it strange that there are people who don't perceive this aspect of her personality as obvious.

The narcissistic style of her personality stands out through a moltitude of details at basically every line of the English girl description of her behaviour, for example. It stands out in the description of her behaviour in prison. It is obvious from her writings. It is obvious from details like her copying people (imitation of piercings of Laura for example). She was a narcissist even in her movement and facial expression, even when she entered a public courtroom for the first time in 2008, you could perceive immediately the narcissistic reaction to public exposure. Overall, without entering details, she would always show off, she was evasive, unsincere and shielded, she tends to be megalomainac (think about her letter to the court and imitation of AlJazeera campaign just as recent example) and her behaviour is always inappropriate. She just came across as an unemphatic character.

You simply are lying Machiavelli. To the forum and more significantly to yourself.

I don't know Amanda so I can't say that she isn't a narcissist. You don't know her either so you can's say that she is. Like the Italian cops, you think you can read people. Which of course is nonsense. Everything you say starts with your belief that Amanda is guilty. Those are the glasses that you view her and you are unable to view her actions and her behavior outside of that perspective.

Interesting that you say that Amanda is a megalomaniac when in fact her behavior is 180 degrees opposite of that. Amanda has been in Seattle for two years and the paparazzi have been following her since day one and what have they discovered? Wild parties? No. Drunken orgies? No. Drug fueled binges? No? Arrests? No. Amanda would have the option of going to Hollywood parties, but did she? No, Amanda finished her book and went to school.

Amanda situation could make her the center of attention pretty much everywhere. Her name could have been in the press every day since she was released from that Italian hell hole. But was it? HELL NO. Her actions has been as low profile as it could possibly be.

Your definition of narcissist and megalomaniac must be through some crazy Italian translation, because the facts don't support your assertions.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)

I know, I know... we all react to death differently... but gleeful? Someone's got problems...

Do you remember her court testimony, when she described Meredith's death imitating a chocking with sound effects, and repeatedly called her death "disgusting"?

 

[Machiavelli]

You simply are lying Machiavelli. To the forum and more significantly to yourself.

I don't know Amanda so I can't say that she isn't a narcissist. You don't know her either so you can's say that she is. Like the Italian cops, you think you can read people. Which of course is nonsense. Everything you say starts with your belief that Amanda is guilty. (...)

It's false. It's your own rationalization. Like pretty much the rest of your assertions.

 

[davefoc]

...
On this you are plain wrong. I thoulgt I made it clear n the past as well; I say it now again: my assessment that Knox is a pathological narcissist is totally independent from my conclusion that she is guilty of murder.
She would be a narcissist even if she were innocent - actually, she would be even more pathological and narcissist to my eyes if she were actually innocent (in that case part of her behaviour should be explained on pure pathological ground, instead of explaining it as logical behaviour consequent to being guilty).

Her pathological narcissism is - to me - something that stands out in a more immediate and obvious way than her guilt. I must say, I actually find it strange that there are people who don't perceive this aspect of her personality as obvious.

The narcissistic style of her personality stands out through a moltitude of details at basically every line of the English girl description of her behaviour, for example. It stands out in the description of her behaviour in prison. It is obvious from her writings. It is obvious from details like her copying people (imitation of piercings of Laura for example). She was a narcissist even in her movement and facial expression, even when she entered a public courtroom for the first time in 2008, you could perceive immediately the narcissistic reaction to public exposure. Overall, without entering details, she would always show off, she was evasive, unsincere and shielded, she tends to be megalomainac (think about her letter to the court and imitation of AlJazeera campaign just as recent example) and her behaviour is always inappropriate. She just came across as an unemphatic character.

FWIW, I thought you might say something like this. I sympathize a bit. I see it as a suggestion that you do not understand the degree to which your confirmation biases are controlling your thinking.

But it is also possible that my confirmation biases have made me closed to negative assessments of Knox's personalities. Confirmation biases are very difficult to detect in one's self.

For me she is a courageous, intelligent woman who has been put through one of the most unusual set of circumstances in history and she is dealing with her situation in ways that strike me as completely reasonable.

Frankly, I didn't know enough to evaluate the evidence you put forth about Knox's personality, but I will outline what I understand and what I think about it:
1. Narcissist based on movement and facial expression
I haven't seen enough video of Knox in court to have any opinion about this kind of thing. I have never seen any video of her where I noticed anything like this. I suspect that all people have some narcissistic tendencies and when we are young we less capable of hiding them than when we are older.
2. Narcissistic from her writings
I would need specific examples of what you have in mind. I have been impressed with everything that I have read that she written, but I have probably read less than most here. My wife read her entire book and my wife has a very positive view of Knox and never mentioned that she had any sense that Knox was unusually narcissistic.
3. Copying people indicates narcissism
Does it? I would have thought the opposite, but if so all people copy other people to some degree. Young women in particular copy each other and create fashion. I don't understand the process very well but I don't think every young woman that copies what a friend wears is showing signs of unusual narcissism.
4. Evasive, insincere and shielded
I have never read anything where I thought she was being evasive or insincere. Her views of the world on some things seem similar to mine when I was her age. In particular, I would have had more faith in the objectivity of police and prosecutors than I do now and I would certainly have cooperated with them as she did because I would not have suspected that they would attempt to use unethical or illegal actions to gain my conviction. I think to understand what you mean here I would need to see what the specific examples are that you have in mind.
5. Megalomaniac
Really? I had to look this up because I wasn't sure you and I had the same word in mind. From Wikipedia:

Megalomania is a psychopathological disorder characterized by delusional fantasies of power, relevance, or omnipotence.

I don't know what makes you think this is the case. I guess, if you believe she manipulated Sollecito into committing murder you might think something vaguely like this, but if she really had the power to manipulate Sollecito to this degree would her sense of power be delusional?
6. Imitation of Al Jazeera campaign indicates narcissism
I don't know anything about this. Are you talking about Al Jazeera news service? What kind of campaigns do they have and how did Knox emulate them?

 

[RoseMontague]

Robin Butterworth testifying in court:

"I found Amanda's behavior very strange and I found it quite difficult to be around her"

"She said Knox and Sollecito fooled around as they waited.

"I remember Amanda sticking her tongue out at Raffaele," Butterworth said in English, her testimony translated for the court. "They were talking and joking, kissing and cuddling.""

Amy Frost, another witness who was also at the police station, said Knox "made faces," such as crossing her eyes and sticking her tongue out. She was "giggling" and kissing Sollecito, said Frost.

"She didn't show any sadness. She wasn't crying. She seemed quite angry and a bit frustrated and sometimes happy," said another one, Natalie Hayward."
--------------------

I know, I know... we all react to death differently... but gleeful? Someone's got problems...

Altieri testimony

Mignini: Listen, when… do you remember if you saw Amanda cry in the Police Station?
Altieri: Amanda had already cried outside the house, also going to the Police Station in the car, yes, at a certain point…
Mignini: when did she cry?
Altieri: Now, after I… she asked me this… I don’t remember well if she asked how, with what she had been killed, basically, how they had cut her throat, and when I gave her the answer to this question she burst out crying.

Carlo Della Vedova: however earlier you said that Amanda cried the first time when you were outside the house, then also in the car.
Luca Altieri: Yes, it’s there that… its there that I saw him [Raffaele] console her, outside the house when she was crying.
Carlo Della Vedova: and did it seem right that she behaved that way or did it seem strange?
Luca Altieri: no, it seemed normal

 

[RandyN]

Randy though you have a tongue in cheek, I am addressing the second point with my suggestion that Amanda should be working on the docudrama of her case to counter what has transpired and is transpiring.

You have bashed her attorneys and I tend to agree for the most part. Today her advisers are failing her as much as her legal people did throughout.

I agree! And I think they longer they wait the harder it will be given the short attention span of people everywhere. OTOH...

A docudrama would be an expensive proposition and although it seems that a profitable result could come to some producer I wonder how prohibitive the cost might be to undertake a project like this when self funded?

I am puzzled as to why no investigative news organizations takes on this story. Perhaps they cant see the big picture of what has to be an endemic corruption or craziness in a supposedly modern countries judicial system.

And it is not as if this case does not provide overwhelming evidence of suspect, odd, and crazy departure of balance and logic or even following ones own laws in the judiciary. If a producer wanted to they could use a number of other example cases that show abusive prosecution like Migninis MOF case. And departures of logic like Scazzi and earthquake scientists and the picture that the system is faulty from top to bottom...ISC rulings in the Knox case (there are a couple of humdingers), the pedophile case, etc...

The Knox family obviously cant summon the resources to do a story that begins to explain what has happened over the last 6 years in Italy. Or that the judicial system is horribly off track. Its easier for the press to say...hey look... 30 (or whatever) judges plus a whole country cant all be wrong. Its hard to argue against that when you are not fully informed of the whole story of this case.

A FRONTLINE investigation could do this story...a underfunded docudrama could end muddying the water even further...let's watch what this Russell/Vogt production does. Hopefully it will provide a resource that leaves the viewer asking more questions than they will certainly not answer. OTOH...people can be very UN-inquisitive and even stupid and thoughtless given the 24/7 news slants they become addicted to and governed by.

The defense was useless...I stand by that. Knox lawyer tried to deny she was hit by police. WTH? Mignini walked over them as if they were not present. And they may as well not have been. Dumb azzes couldn't even tell Knox how to dress properly.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)
Your definition of narcissist and megalomaniac must be through some crazy Italian translation, because the facts don't support your assertions.

I am basically the author of the Italian Wikipedia page about NPD; I wrote basically the entire page and if I recall correctly I am also the user who created it. The page is short, no one else contributed significantly.
My "definition" of Narcissistic Personality Disprders is actually not mine, it's only what derives from North American manuals and more proinently I referred to the earliest of definitions of Otto Kernberg and Heinz Kohut, but also to Alexander Lowen (which I could not ignore as I had to to do with actors and physical performers) and the more recent most "official" academic bibliography. See a good overview in: Ronningstam, Disorders of Narcissism. Diagnostic, Clinical and Empiricl Implications (1998, American Psychiatric Press).

 

[anglolawyer]

I don't recall having seen such a post detailing "lies" of Stefanoni.

I was referring to this post.

On the other hand, I noted that no one was able to answer about my posts detailing and showing some of Vecchiotti's lies. Your answer about one of them was a non-reasonable claim: I think you refused to believe a news source reporting Vecchiotti's words from the court room. Other people refused to accept Crini's or Comodi's statements and Stefanoni's declaration about negative controls being deposited with Micheli's court in 2008.

I don't recall the thing about the news source but I plead guilty to not believing the claim that negative controls were filed in 2008. More importantly, I don't see that claim, even if true, as remotely satisfying the reasonable and necessary requirement of complete openness by the prosecution.

 

[acbytesla]

It's false. It's your own rationalization. Like pretty much the rest of your assertions.

No it's not, it's observation. I read Amanda's book and I've been reading your rantings for the last couple of years. She comes across as sincere, honest and likable.

I can't say the same about you.

But hey, you could be a nice guy and Amanda might be a bitch. Since I don't know either of you, either could be true. At least that's honest. Something that isn't true about your arguments. The fact that you can think that you can say that Amanda is narcissistic shows that your comments are delusional.

 

[anglolawyer]

Is there a method for plucking ones posts from the great mass thereof? I posted quite a detailed list of behaviours of Knox, described by a neutral source, showing her to be variously tired, stressed, angry, upset, considerate and concerned while enduring the long wait at the questura. I have no idea how to find it.

 

[Machiavelli]

FWIW, I thought you might say something like this. I sympathize a bit. I see it as a suggestion that you do not understand the degree to which your confirmation biases are controlling your thinking.

If you wish to set a discussion about Knox's narcissistic personality, let's agree and decide to focus on that, since on my part that would occupy the discussion entirely (certainly I would focus only on that discussion alone). I don't think other posters may be interested in that topic, however.

I recall one thing, anyway: I have pointed out in the past tht being a pathological narcissist is no evidence of being murderer (unless there is some circumstantial element connecting the specific murder to a psychologic condition). There are millions of narcissisits and almost all of them are not murderers. I pointed out that these two are separate issues.

 

[Planigale]

Come on Guys. This is just silly. To diagnose a personality disorder would take a trained clinical psychologist carrying out a formal examination and probably obtaining third party history and carrying out personality analysis. It is dependant on 'normal' behaviour not that in exceptional circumstances.

It is irrelevant, personality disorder or not, to arguments re guilt or not.

Mach can have his opinion, but it is that of an unqualified person. His grip on psychology may be no firmer than his grip on the nature of DNA.

I would point out that 'imitation' would be against having a narcissistic personality. I would also point out that most women have pierced ears but there again we are all narcissistic …. Mirror mirror on the wall who's the cutest marsupial on JREF - Planigale!

 

[acbytesla]

Robin Butterworth testifying in court:

"I found Amanda's behavior very strange and I found it quite difficult to be around her"

"She said Knox and Sollecito fooled around as they waited.

"I remember Amanda sticking her tongue out at Raffaele," Butterworth said in English, her testimony translated for the court. "They were talking and joking, kissing and cuddling.""

Amy Frost, another witness who was also at the police station, said Knox "made faces," such as crossing her eyes and sticking her tongue out. She was "giggling" and kissing Sollecito, said Frost.

"She didn't show any sadness. She wasn't crying. She seemed quite angry and a bit frustrated and sometimes happy," said another one, Natalie Hayward."
--------------------

I know, I know... we all react to death differently... but gleeful? Someone's got problems...

One, I have always wondered if this wasn't group thought. That people saw bits and it turned into this. Mignini tells them that Amanda killed their friend and then together, they remember these odd things about Amanda and Raffaele that they didn't even think of until that moment.

Never the less, as you said, people deal with death in different ways. Also, I'd guess this was hours and hours after after Meredith's body was discovered. The environment had to be surreal. From what I can see, there was a combination of worry, concern and certainly boredom. I would have probably been bouncing off the walls in that environment.

Does that make Amanda "narcissistic"? Strange maybe, but not narcissistic. A narcissist is in love with themselves. Someone as pretty as Amanda would have been "primping" constantly in front of a mirror. Every moment in her life would have been about her. I've yet to see comments from people that actually know Amanda say this. In fact, it has always been the exact opposite. That she is caring and would give you the shirt off her back if you needed it.

The chaplain at the prison thinks very highly of Amanda. Isn't that interesting? Amanda is unique, a narcissist? NO.

 

[NancyS]

Sure, everyone has a right to speculate about everything they like. Accusing Stefanoni or Mignini of fabricating false evidence are vile false allegations. Accusing Quintavalle of lying is an unsupported claim. But your opinion that someone is a narcissist, or ugly, or selfish etc., when based on iterpretation of true facts, these are just normal perceptions.

On this you are plain wrong. I thoulgt I made it clear n the past as well; I say it now again: my assessment that Knox is a pathological narcissist is totally independent from my conclusion that she is guilty of murder.
She would be a narcissist even if she were innocent - actually, she would be even more pathological and narcissist to my eyes if she were actually innocent (in that case part of her behaviour should be explained on pure pathological ground, instead of explaining it as logical behaviour consequent to being guilty).

Her pathological narcissism is - to me - something that stands out in a more immediate and obvious way than her guilt. I must say, I actually find it strange that there are people who don't perceive this aspect of her personality as obvious.

The narcissistic style of her personality stands out through a moltitude of details at basically every line of the English girl description of her behaviour, for example. It stands out in the description of her behaviour in prison. It is obvious from her writings. It is obvious from details like her copying people (imitation of piercings of Laura for example). She was a narcissist even in her movement and facial expression, even when she entered a public courtroom for the first time in 2008, you could perceive immediately the narcissistic reaction to public exposure. Overall, without entering details, she would always show off, she was evasive, unsincere and shielded, she tends to be megalomainac (think about her letter to the court and imitation of AlJazeera campaign just as recent example) and her behaviour is always inappropriate. She just came across as an unemphatic character.

I think this says far more about you than it does about Amanda Knox. It sounds like you are projecting all kinds of thoughts/feelings/hatred onto Amanda - and it does sound like you have some very unusual thoughts about how young women should be.

You also need to have a huge amount of cultural sensitivity when making any kind of psychiatric diagnosis - an Italian psychiatrist would probably not be able to make a good assessment of someone from the US - and vice versa

 

[Machiavelli]

No it's not, it's observation. I read Amanda's book and I've been reading your rantings for the last couple of years. She comes across as sincere, honest and likable.

She looks sincere also when she says things in contradiction with what she said in her court testimony? And with what she said in her Dec. 17.th interrogation?
The fact that she claims of being interrogated by Mignini in her book, while instead she does not claim that at all in 2008 before judge Micheli - she says she only released a statement - nor ever in the trial, this makes her look sincere?
The fact that her book story is in flat contradiction with Anna Donnino, makes her look sincere? No doubt?
The fact that she said that she accused Patrick because "it could be true" makes her look sincere?
The expression "the best truth that I can think about" is something likable to you?
The fact that "the only thing" she is "sure" about was that she had dinner after 10pm, something that was proven false, makes her look sincere?
The fact that she says "the truth is I don't know what the truth is", and that later she claims she remembers exactly a whole (changing) story, but does not explain how she managed to recover the memory and how she managed to distinguish it as the "true" one (given her false memory), does this lack of explanation makes her look "sincere"? Dos she look consistent to you?
The statemen "I am vary afraid of Patrick" is likable?
The detail that the only time she mentioned Meredith as a living person in her writings, was to say that she put herself something in the washing machine (but maybe picked something...), is that something likable of her?
The fact that when she realized that someone had been in the house (thus she understood that the "strange" things, the open door, the blood in the bathroom were not normal) she felf "unconfortble" and leave, did she not check for Meredith, is that likable and caring? Meredith could have been injured, could be needing help. She didn't look for her, she lost another 30-45 minutes at least. And the fact that, in addition to this, while she felt worried about these things, she told about these things to Sollecito only calmly while sitting "over breakfast", would tha be likable if true? and then she called Meredith on the phone for only 5 ad 4 seconds, is that likable?
Sound effects on the descrition of Meredith's chocking to dath, calling it "disgusting", would you call that "empathic" (maybe that's likable to you)?

 

[Machiavelli]

Does that make Amanda "narcissistic"? Strange maybe, but not narcissistic. A narcissist is in love with themselves. Someone as pretty as Amanda would have been "primping" constantly in front of a mirror. Every moment in her life would have been about her. I've yet to see comments from people that actually know Amanda say this. In fact, it has always been the exact opposite. That she is caring and would give you the shirt off her back if you needed it.

A narcissist is not in love with themselves. Nascissists despise themselves. Narcissists are in love with and invested into idealized projection of themselves, called the "grandiose self". Which is a unreal self.

The chaplain at the prison thinks very highly of Amanda. Isn't that interesting? Amanda is unique, a narcissist? NO.

The chaplain Don Saulo is a notorious idiot. He was known for being an redneck when he was working as a priest in a parrish in the outskirts of Perugia.

 

[Grinder]

When I put "narcissism personality disorder Italian wiki" into google guess what came up? Really I couldn't believe it

Machiavellianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[davefoc]

Come on Guys. This is just silly. To diagnose a personality disorder would take a trained clinical psychologist carrying out a formal examination and probably obtaining third party history and carrying out personality analysis. It is dependant on 'normal' behaviour not that in exceptional circumstances.

It is irrelevant, personality disorder or not, to arguments re guilt or not.

Mach can have his opinion, but it is that of an unqualified person. His grip on psychology may be no firmer than his grip on the nature of DNA.

I would point out that 'imitation' would be against having a narcissistic personality. I would also point out that most women have pierced ears but there again we are all narcissistic …. Mirror mirror on the wall who's the cutest marsupial on JREF - Planigale!

Valid points. My view is that Machiavelli's diagnosis of Knox is driven by his confirmation biases but I also acknowledge that my opposite views might be driven by my own biases.

I attempted to look objectively at the evidence put forth by Machiavelli to support his claims.

Machiavelli's response, as I understood it, was that he has a good knowledge of this subject, that he is right, but that to go beyond what he has posted would require a digression that he thinks the people participating in this thread wouldn't be interested in.

I am fine with dropping the whole subject. I think it is obvious that people's perception of Knox's personality are colored by their views of her involvement in the murder of Kercher and vice versa. Machiavelli has acknowledged that even if Knox had a narcissistic personality disorder it would not provide evidence that she was guilty of murder. That seems probable to me.

It does seem like the only possible evidence to support his contention that Knox might be psychopathic is that he believes she is guilty of murder for no apparent other reason. This seems like an entirely circularly reasoned view . i.e. Knox committed murder because she might be psychopathic and she might be psychopathic because she committed murder.

Psychopathic describes a fairly unusual but also fairly clear cut condition in which a person has unusually low empathy and is prone to committing serious anti-social crimes. What possible indication of this is there in Knox's personality, unless one believes that Knox is guilty of a murder for which there is no other apparent motive?

If this is Machiavelli's point then I agree with it to a degree. If Knox was involved in the murder of Kercher then the probable cause was that she is a psychopath because there is zero evidence of any other plausible motive. However, I think, the vastly more likely conclusion is that Knox and Sollecito are absolutely innocent of the murder of Kercher and they are absolutely innocent of any involvement in the murder of Kercher.

There is zero reliable evidence against Knox and Sollecito, there is zero evidence of a plausible motive for their behavior, there is zero evidence of any Knox or Sollecito behaviors before or after the murder suggesting psychopathic behavior and there is strong evidence of their non-involvement in the murder of Kercher. It is hard to see how somebody can derive a diagnosis of possible psychopathic behavior in a situation like this if their thinking is not driven by an overwhelming and non falsifiable confirmation bias.

 

[Caper]

I am basically the author of the Italian Wikipedia page about NPD; I wrote basically the entire page and if I recall correctly I am also the user who created it. The page is short, no one else contributed significantly.
My "definition" of Narcissistic Personality Disprders is actually not mine, it's only what derives from North American manuals and more proinently I referred to the earliest of definitions of Otto Kernberg and Heinz Kohut, but also to Alexander Lowen (which I could not ignore as I had to to do with actors and physical performers) and the more recent most "official" academic bibliography. See a good overview in: Ronningstam, Disorders of Narcissism. Diagnostic, Clinical and Empiricl Implications (1998, American Psychiatric Press).

Mach... I think you have denilism. I just found the disorder when I googled "people who deny reality".

I really am quite amazed by you. I do respect the fact you continue to come here... and basically get piled on by everyone.

I wouldn't think you could know as much about the case as you do and still possibly believe in guilt unless you have some psychological disorder.

It amazes me how you can spend so much time arguing the minutiae of the case, without looking at the larger picture and seeing just how stupid the case really is. Do you ever have doubt? Did you ever think... maybe police pressure did cause the false allegation. Maybe Rudy did act alone.... and not meet AK and RS for what must be the most outlandish murder plot in the history of murder plots.

Does the potential embarrassment bother you as an Italian? Are you related to someone involved in the case and somehow AK and RS being innocent would cause family shame?

I watch you on here.... It's fascinating. I often see you get asked 5 questions in one post and you'll focus in the one where you can argue the specifics of Italian law and completely ignore questions where you might have to look at how stupid the premise is on its face..... Like the TOD questions... and how this could have possibly went down the way you believe it did, in such a short amount of time... Involving 3 people who barely know eachother. It is absolutely absurd.... and I think if you ever had to focus on it, you might begin to see it.