Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Samson]

Indeed. In my opinion, it's disingenuous at best, and morally repugnant at worst, to create this sort of false dichotomy in which a belief that Knox/Sollecito should be acquitted is automatically incompatible with empathy/sympathy for Kercher's family and friends.

To me, one of the (many) horrible aspects of this sorry case is the way in which the Kercher family appears to have been guided in their beliefs by the Perugia authorities. It's very easy to see how a grieving, confused family could become entranced by the apparent authority of people such as Mignini, Comodi, Giobbi, Massei and Nencini, reinforced by the (false) automatic belief that such authority figures are disinterested, morally-upright individuals who have no agenda other than "solving the crime".

I very much hope that if/when this whole thing unravels, the friends and family of the victim will - perhaps not immediately but in time - come to understand and accept two crucial things: 1) there never was any credible, reliable evidence of Knox's/Sollecito's participation in the murder, and 2) all the reliable, credible evidence is wholly consistent with Guede acting alone. But of course none of that will ameliorate the unnecessary years of uncertainty, cognitive dissonance and financial penalty that the Kerchers will have gone through as a direct result of the incompetence and misconduct of various individuals in Perugia law enforcement and the Italian courts.

LondonJohn, this case challenges me in a totally unprecedented way. I can never empathise with the Kercher position.

 

[Desert Fox]

LondonJohn, this case challenges me in a totally unprecedented way. I can never empathise with the Kercher position.

Take a significant person in your life, imagine that they were killed, and the cops tell you that somebody did it. You really want to believe the cops and most of the time they get it right. You want to blame somebody and you get stuck on the person you are told by the cops did it. Later there is evidence that they did not do it.

Could you brake free. . . .Few people manage.

 

[carbonjam72]

'Thoughtful' question -

Oscar Pistorius is reckoned by judge Masipa to have genuinely believed he was shooting an intruder.
Let us set aside that finding for convenience, but thoughtful/Leila Shnepps/professor of mathematics truly believes she is correct in that finding.
Notwithstanding this, she is calling a christmas celebration of Oscar being taken down for culpable manslaughter in Paris, because the Christmas celebration of AK and RS being taken down is delayed.

Does anyone know if Leila Shnepp's daughter has some relationship with Rudy Guede prior to the Kercher killing? Was her daughter's boyfriend actually friends with Rudy, or something like that?

I've seen allusions to some relationship, and I can well imagine that a mother will do, say, write or believe anything in defense of her children.

I think this would go a long way towards explaining Shnepps/thoughtful's cognitive dissonance long on display in this case.

 

[Samson]

Does anyone know if Leila Shnepp's daughter has some relationship with Rudy Guede prior to the Kercher killing? Was her daughter's boyfriend actually friends with Rudy, or something like that?

I've seen allusions to some relationship, and I can well imagine that a mother will do, say, write or believe anything in defense of her children.

I think this would go a long way towards explaining Shnepps/thoughtful's cognitive dissonance long on display in this case.

delete

 

[Samson]

Take a significant person in your life, imagine that they were killed, and the cops tell you that somebody did it. You really want to believe the cops and most of the time they get it right. You want to blame somebody and you get stuck on the person you are told by the cops did it. Later there is evidence that they did not do it.

Could you brake free. . . .Few people manage.

Desert Fox.
This case annoys me to the extent that the thread continues to a totally unprecedented length. If there was even a snowball's chance in hell that the thread was wrong it would be dead. I find as fact that they are uninvolved, so everyone that suggests otherwise are .......

 

[Desert Fox]

Desert Fox.
This case annoys me to the extent that the thread continues to a totally unprecedented length. If there was even a snowball's chance in hell that the thread was wrong it would be dead. I find as fact that they are uninvolved, so everyone that suggests otherwise are .......

Those on the pro guilt sude could likely use the exact same argument. . . .The 9-11 truthers use similar arguments as well.

I agree with you that I am virtually certain that AK/RS are innocent of the crimes that they were charged with. . . .Don't get me wrong.

 

[carbonjam72]

delete

what?

 

[Samson]

Those on the pro guilt sude could likely use the exact same argument. . . .The 9-11 truthers use similar arguments as well.

I agree with you that I am virtually certain that AK/RS are innocent of the crimes that they were charged with. . . .Don't get me wrong.

DF there are no similar cases, to suggest so will prolong the agony. As Shakespeare says, let me list the ways.
1. A defined and confessed perpetrator is in jail.
2. A United states senator declares an injustice.
3. A United States judge declares absolute innocence.
4. An Italian judge declares absolute innocence.
5. Several American and British scientists declare innocence ranging from highly probable to certain.
6. The longest neutral thread in internet criminal history is now contributed to almost exclusively by those who believe in factual innocence.
7. The prosecutor of first instance was convicted by a court in his own country of criminal conduct.
8. The prosecutor thus convicted is a personal friend of the judge who first convicted.
9. A judge in the country that this first friend of the prosecutor coinvicted declared that Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were innocent, and later challenged any Italian person to take responsibilty to jail the innocent.

After all this, are you truly a little equivocal?

I am not, because to be so would be to be subservient to false and seized authority.

Amen.

 

[Desert Fox]

I am as sure as I can be of anything that they are innocent.
I have however been sure of other things that I now think was wrong.

Really is not the issue. I don't hate the person who really thinks that they were kidnapped by extraterrestrials and probed. More just feel sorry for them. Similar issue here. I don't think there is much chance of convincing. Worth a try but likely futile.

 

[platonov]

Indeed. In my opinion, it's disingenuous at best, and morally repugnant at worst, to create this sort of false dichotomy in which a belief that Knox/Sollecito should be acquitted is automatically incompatible with empathy/sympathy for Kercher's family and friends.

To me, one of the (many) horrible aspects of this sorry case is the way in which the Kercher family appears to have been guided in their beliefs by the Perugia authorities. It's very easy to see how a grieving, confused family could become entranced by the apparent authority of people such as Mignini, Comodi, Giobbi, Massei and Nencini, reinforced by the (false) automatic belief that such authority figures are disinterested, morally-upright individuals who have no agenda other than "solving the crime".

I very much hope that if/when this whole thing unravels, the friends and family of the victim will - perhaps not immediately but in time - come to understand and accept two crucial things: 1) there never was any credible, reliable evidence of Knox's/Sollecito's participation in the murder, and 2) all the reliable, credible evidence is wholly consistent with Guede acting alone. But of course none of that will ameliorate the unnecessary years of uncertainty, cognitive dissonance and financial penalty that the Kerchers will have gone through as a direct result of the incompetence and misconduct of various individuals in Perugia law enforcement and the Italian courts.

Crazy people targeting online abuse at the family of crime/murder victims are in the news.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...enda-leyland-madeleine-mccann-trolling-claims

A sad tale but one with possible parallels to the Kercher case.

 

[AmyStrange]

Stupid is as stupid does

-

Crazy people targeting online abuse at the family of crime/murder victims are in the news.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...enda-leyland-madeleine-mccann-trolling-claims

A sad tale but one with possible parallels to the Kercher case.

-

Although I do have a great deal of sympathy for the Kerchers (way more for Meredith though, because of the horrifying way she died), I do take issue with their allowing Maresca to show death photos of their daughter on a big screen in open court. That was just plain disgusting and they should be ashamed of themselves. It was a stupid callous move by a stupid callous lawyer who obviously doesn't care one iota about Meredith, in my opinion.

And what did it accomplish? Nothing. They were still found not guilty at that trial,

d

-

 

[carbonjam72]

Crazy people targeting online abuse at the family of crime/murder victims are in the news.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...enda-leyland-madeleine-mccann-trolling-claims

A sad tale but one with possible parallels to the Kercher case.

Sound familiar;

"The judge said Gerry and Kate McCann, who did not attend court, had suffered injury to their reputations and feelings, and had resorted to legal action not to punish Bennett but to put a stop to his repeated conduct.
He agreed with lawyers for the McCanns that Bennett had played "cat and mouse" with them by complying with the undertakings some of the time. "He was testing them with false or disingenuous assurances and demands for explanations to which, as a member of the public with no responsibility for law enforcement, he was not entitled."

And the tabloids make money no matter who gets hurt.

 

[lonepinealex]

What you quote strains credibility and is not what the prosecution are now alleging am I not right in saying? I think some of the PGP community want it to be true in the most macabre fashion because it would be such a riveting and extraordinary story. Who would be much interested in a more mundane narrative?

It's true that none of the prosecution theories have been as outlandish as the quoted scenario (except possibly Mignini's first Satanic ritual one). But the prosecution theories are also full of holes and make no sense under scrutiny. I'm not alone in being convinced of A & R's innocence after reading the Massei motivation.

I think the reason guilters come up with outlandish scenarios is that they have to in order for the crime as they see it to hang together. Because they've actually thought about the case, and can't ignore the holes and the facts - they have to find ways to explain or get round the inconvenient truths and timelines. That's why so many of them are forced to construct extraordinary narratives that inevitably diminish (or exclude) Guede's involvement.

Of course it's lunacy, but that's where insisting upon Amanda (and by extension Raffaele's) guilt gets you.

 

[LondonJohn]

Crazy people targeting online abuse at the family of crime/murder victims are in the news.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...enda-leyland-madeleine-mccann-trolling-claims

A sad tale but one with possible parallels to the Kercher case.

As you very well know, it's not about targeting online abuse at "the family of crime/murder victims" - it's strictly about targeting online abuse at those whom the abusers believe to have committed the crime, especially if the abusers feel that those people have somehow "got away with it".

In the case of the McCanns (and the Ramseys before them), there is a very, very similar dynamic to much of the online campaigning vilification aimed at Knox and Sollecito. These internet "warriors", often hide under the cloak of anonymity, and almost all claim (bogus) legitimacy by "speaking for a victim who can no longer speak for themselves".

I do indeed see strikingly similar parallels between someone like Brenda Leyland and many of the individuals who use similar tactics and language to attack Knox and Sollecito. The motivation in both cases is the same: a form of evangelical zeal to "punish" those whom they believe to have committed the crime, with an unhealthy dose of vindictiveness and vicarious "sitting in judgement" thrown in.

 

[LondonJohn]

It's true that none of the prosecution theories have been as outlandish as the quoted scenario (except possibly Mignini's first Satanic ritual one). But the prosecution theories are also full of holes and make no sense under scrutiny. I'm not alone in being convinced of A & R's innocence after reading the Massei motivation.

I think the reason guilters come up with outlandish scenarios is that they have to in order for the crime as they see it to hang together. Because they've actually thought about the case, and can't ignore the holes and the facts - they have to find ways to explain or get round the inconvenient truths and timelines. That's why so many of them are forced to construct extraordinary narratives that inevitably diminish (or exclude) Guede's involvement.

Of course it's lunacy, but that's where insisting upon Amanda (and by extension Raffaele's) guilt gets you.

Yes - and this is one of the fundamental problems here. The prosecution/court narrative for guilt has to fit the "evidence", but in order to make it do so, it has to be preposterously improbable.

A good example is the ridiculous narrative surrounding the "multiple knives". The prosecutors and convicting courts start with the necessity of having Sollecito's kitchen knife involved in the attack, since it's one of their crucial pieces of "evidence" against Sollecito and Knox. Putting aside for just one moment the objective fact that the DNA "evidence" on that knife is worthless and utterly unreliable, the prosecutors and convicting courts then come up against a threefold problem: firstly, it's beyond doubt that Sollecito's knife could not have caused at least one of the stab wounds in Kercher's neck; secondly, the wound which was at least physically possible to have been made by Sollecito's knife is in fact hugely unlikely to have been made by that knife, since there are clear hilt marks around the wound that are only consistent with a much smaller knife being plunged in up to the hilt; and thirdly, there's a clear imprint in blood of a much smaller, thinner-bladed knife on the bedsheet - a knife which is totally consistent with all of the stab wounds, including the one with the hilt marks.

So faced with all the above, some deft "reasoning" is required. In this instance, the clumsy and wildly-improbably "solution" is that two knives were held to Kercher's throat simultaneously by two different people, and that each knife was used in turn to inflict the stab wounds. Even a complete idiot could realise that it defies logic and human reasoning that two different assailants could be holding a knife each to the victim's throat: on top of the issues regarding positioning of the various individuals (victim and the two assailants with knives), there's simply too much chance of one assailant accidentally injuring the other! If two knives were to be used in an incident such as this, it's far more likely that one person might hold a knife to the victim's throat, while another person might (for example) hold the second knife to the victim's abdomen.

 

[platonov]

Of mice and cheese.

As you very well know, it's not about targeting online abuse at "the family of crime/murder victims" - it's strictly about targeting online abuse at those whom the abusers believe to have committed the crime, especially if the abusers feel that those people have somehow "got away with it".

In the case of the McCanns (and the Ramseys before them), there is a very, very similar dynamic to much of the online campaigning vilification aimed at Knox and Sollecito. These internet "warriors", often hide under the cloak of anonymity, and almost all claim (bogus) legitimacy by "speaking for a victim who can no longer speak for themselves".

I do indeed see strikingly similar parallels between someone like Brenda Leyland and many of the individuals who use similar tactics and language to attack Knox and Sollecito. The motivation in both cases is the same: a form of evangelical zeal to "punish" those whom they believe to have committed the crime, with an unhealthy dose of vindictiveness and vicarious "sitting in judgement" thrown in.

Oh, I know very well what the point of my post was but I can’t say your argument surprises me – to put it very mildly.

Whatever about other cases you can’t surely be intimating that the Kercher family were involved in MK’s murder ??

Although given the abuse directed at her family (and to a certain extent everyone involved in the prosecution case – especially female cops/prosecutors/witnesses) anything is possible. It’s no more absurd or vile than many of the arguments posted here or elsewhere.

But there is one obvious difference – the unfortunate character in the piece I linked to took her own life when exposed. Many of the Knox groupies, whether anonymous or not, seem to positively revel in and be proud of abusing the murder victim and her family.

 

[Desert Fox]

Oh, I know very well what the point of my post was but I can’t say your argument surprises me – to put it very mildly.

Whatever about other cases you can’t surely be intimating that the Kercher family were involved in MK’s murder ??

Although given the abuse directed at her family (and to a certain extent everyone involved in the prosecution case – especially female cops/prosecutors/witnesses) anything is possible. It’s no more absurd or vile than many of the arguments posted here or elsewhere.

But there is one obvious difference – the unfortunate character in the piece I linked to took her own life when exposed. Many of the Knox groupies, whether anonymous or not, seem to positively revel in and be proud of abusing the murder victim and her family.

I have only seen on these discussions the most mild of complaints against Meredeth's family. Most is that they just cannot understand why they are unwilling to actually look at the evidence.

 

[Samson]

Oh, I know very well what the point of my post was but I can’t say your argument surprises me – to put it very mildly.

Whatever about other cases you can’t surely be intimating that the Kercher family were involved in MK’s murder ??

Although given the abuse directed at her family (and to a certain extent everyone involved in the prosecution case – especially female cops/prosecutors/witnesses) anything is possible. It’s no more absurd or vile than many of the arguments posted here or elsewhere.

But there is one obvious difference – the unfortunate character in the piece I linked to took her own life when exposed. Many of the Knox groupies, whether anonymous or not, seem to positively revel in and be proud of abusing the murder victim and her family.

platonov, the Kercher family are legitimate targets for criticism. They need money to pay their bills, and in all probability have a deal with the lawyer Maresca. To break ranks will leave them exposed financially. This is a catastrophic situation for the innocent parties in this lethal chess game. You can rail to your heart's content that this must be a wrong conclusion, but if it is so, a strong alternative theory for their total refusal to engage with the Knox and Sollecito families is required. It is very unusual for a rejection of friendly overtures, where the victims are many for differing reasons.

 

[LondonJohn]

Oh, I know very well what the point of my post was but I can’t say your argument surprises me – to put it very mildly.

Whatever about other cases you can’t surely be intimating that the Kercher family were involved in MK’s murder ??

Although given the abuse directed at her family (and to a certain extent everyone involved in the prosecution case – especially female cops/prosecutors/witnesses) anything is possible. It’s no more absurd or vile than many of the arguments posted here or elsewhere.

But there is one obvious difference – the unfortunate character in the piece I linked to took her own life when exposed. Many of the Knox groupies, whether anonymous or not, seem to positively revel in and be proud of abusing the murder victim and her family.

Oh dear. It may help if you read my post again. Particularly the first sentence of the second paragraph. And the first sentence of the third paragraph. It may help you to understand the comparison I am making.

(You're aware, I presume, that the bitter, vindictive, nasty morons attacking the McCanns online are doing so because they believe the McCanns were themselves partially or wholly responsible for the death of their daughter? Now where else have I seen similar sorts of online behaviour, for exactly the same warped "justification"........?)

 

[Samson]

Oh dear. It may help if you read my post again. Particularly the first sentence of the second paragraph. And the first sentence of the third paragraph. It may help you to understand the comparison I am making.

(You're aware, I presume, that the bitter, vindictive, nasty morons attacking the McCanns online are doing so because they believe the McCanns were themselves partially or wholly responsible for the death of their daughter? Now where else have I seen similar sorts of online behaviour, for exactly the same warped "justification"........?)

It is worth recalling the parallel case of Lindy Chamberlain, who even spent many years in jail before being exonerated 30 years later, for having her precious daughter taken by a wild animal.