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

[AmyStrange]

Everyone lies... except me. I just can't prove it...

-

Speaking of "convicted" liars.... the problem in this case is who controls the "conviction" process.

For instance, Anna Donnino arrives at the interrogation an hour into it, at 12:30 am on the 6th of November. She says she found an interrogation in chaos, and decided to be helpful, rather than be a translator.

But her own admission, she decided to become a"mediator" between Amanda and Ficarra et al., when what Amanda needed was a lawyer.

It's not so much that Donnino ever "lied" to Amanda, per se, but as Amanda reports, this self-admitted mediation on Donnino's part meant she encouraged Amanda to remember things she was not remembering... meaning, imagine what could be true and then tell Ficarra.

What would be really helpful for Stilicho to do would be to put together a timeline of what Amanda was told and when she was told it. Instead, Stilicho jumps straight to the end of the process - one controled by those who themselves are immune from the process. For instance, Amanda gets hit, and then gets charged with a crime for reporting it! And no less than Anna Donnino gets in on that prosecution!!!! Must be nice to have some pull with the people who have the charging authority!

-

Which is why I believe all interrogations that result in confessions should be videotaped. Conflict of interest precludes any belief that only one side would lie to save their own skin and the other side wouldn't, just because they are the authorities.

Authorities do lie all the time. I've experienced this in my own life and know it to be true... but I just can't prove it because I didn't videotape any of it.

Shame on me,

d

-

 

[AmyStrange]

Facts are facts, but opinions are not...

-

That's a tough question Amy. It's not that cut and dried. People can "express their opinion" regardless how damaging it might be even if the opinion is factually wrong. You're entitled to being wrong. So Nancy Grace for example legally can say things that are false as long as it can be said that she his expressing her opinion. This is how so much of the press gets away with saying pretty much anything they like. Opinions are pretty much a sacred right of freedom of speech. That said, I don't think the right is totally absolute. My guess is there is a point where it might be obvious what the person is doing and their recklessness may be viewed as a wanton and deliberate attempt to libel someone. Say, you can prove that Nancy Grace ABSOLUTELY knew what she was saying was false, then we are walking into a gray area.

-

I have no problem with anyone expressing an opinion. It's when these opinions get labeled as news, and then used as facts by other people to support their own opinions. That's just beyond sad.

I'm not innocent of this by any means, but I do try to be aware that it does happen and will admit it when someone catches me doing it.

I'm not perfect, but that's just my opinion,

d

-

 

[AmyStrange]

There is such a thing as psychological torture...

-

Bruce, Bruce Bruce.

Whats all this - why would the steadfast [ ! ] Raffy ever turn on Manders just because he is unjustly imprisoned while she remains at large.
After all they are both innocent victims of the greatest conspiracy ever.

Unless Italian prisons are more brutal than we have been led to believe.
Perhaps they will show him the 'instruments of torture' to make him crack - or take away his shoes or something

Or is it something else that leads you to this gloomy prediction ?????

-

It's interesting how someone can pretend to know what specific psychological acts prove someone is guilty of murder, or at least, involved in some way; but are clueless about how the psychology of a prisoner works, and how damaging and torturous it can be even though it isn't manifested through physical pain,

d

-

 

[Bill Williams]

Bruce, Bruce Bruce.

Whats all this - why would the steadfast [ ! ] Raffy ever turn on Manders just because he is unjustly imprisoned while she remains at large.
After all they are both innocent victims of the greatest conspiracy ever.

Unless Italian prisons are more brutal than we have been led to believe.
Perhaps they will show him the 'instruments of torture' to make him crack - or take away his shoes or something

Or is it something else that leads you to this gloomy prediction ?????

The greatest conspiracy ever? Why do guilters rely on hyperbole?

Most wrongful convictions are "conspiracies" of sorts. The Nyki Kish wrongful conviction has gone through a police investigation, a trial and an appeal. She's still wrongfully convicted. Debra Milke was convicted and sentenced to death on the basis of a "confession" that only one person ever claimed she'd made it. It took an independent court decades later to free her.

Sometimes I wish instead of relying on hyperbole and invective, guilters would put together a timeline of the crime including time of death. They never do.

Do you have an opinion about Judge Nencini relying on female Y-haplotypes to convict these two?

 

[acbytesla]

-


-

I have no problem with anyone expressing an opinion. It's when these opinions get labeled as news, and then used as facts by other people to support their own opinions. That's just beyond sad.

I'm not innocent of this by any means, but I do try to be aware that it does happen and will admit it when someone catches me doing it.

I'm not perfect, but that's just my opinion,

d

-

You're not perfect, but others may dispute that?? I like that. I do have a problem where pundits express opinions and slide in misinformation. Hey if you just make a mistake, that is one thing. But if you are doing it to deliberately spread misinformation, that is another.

Overall, I'd rather society err towards freedom of the speech and press. I think that allows our society to better reform itself when needed. But we pay for that with people who misuse the freedom of speech and the press so they can spread misinformation for their own purposes.

 

[Grinder]

The greatest conspiracy ever? Why do guilters rely on hyperbole?

Most wrongful convictions are "conspiracies" of sorts. The Nyki Kish wrongful conviction has gone through a police investigation, a trial and an appeal. She's still wrongfully convicted. Debra Milke was convicted and sentenced to death on the basis of a "confession" that only one person ever claimed she'd made it. It took an independent court decades later to free her.

Sometimes I wish instead of relying on hyperbole and invective, guilters would put together a timeline of the crime including time of death. They never do.

Do you have an opinion about Judge Nencini relying on female Y-haplotypes to convict these two?

Is this supposed to be ironic humor? Nonsecini isn't relying on female Y-haplotypes for the conviction. It really changes nothing if he says the unidentified markers are male or female.

While it is known that Rudy was caught in the Milan nursery with the stolen laptops and not much more, the PIP call it a one man crime wave. PIP call him a drifter when he lived in Perugia for years and had an apartment. Even Curatolo had an apartment he could use.

It isn't the case that there is no evidence, rather it is poor quality and doesn't prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are a couple of poster of the PIP type that do a lion's share of PIP exaggerations.

For me the PGP's greatest fault is talking about behavior as if it is evidence.

The greatest conspiracy ever talk is just that and not worth responding to.

 

[AmyStrange]

We don't need no stinkin' facts...

-

You're not perfect, but others may dispute that?? I like that. I do have a problem where pundits express opinions and slide in misinformation. Hey if you just make a mistake, that is one thing. But if you are doing it to deliberately spread misinformation, that is another.

Overall, I'd rather society err towards freedom of the speech and press. I think that allows our society to better reform itself when needed. But we pay for that with people who misuse the freedom of speech and the press so they can spread misinformation for their own purposes.

-

I totally agree. Freedom of information is an important right, but freedom to misinform should not be, or at least not be as important,

d

-

 

[Bill Williams]

Is this supposed to be ironic humor? Nonsecini isn't relying on female Y-haplotypes for the conviction. It really changes nothing if he says the unidentified markers are male or female.

While it is known that Rudy was caught in the Milan nursery with the stolen laptops and not much more, the PIP call it a one man crime wave. PIP call him a drifter when he lived in Perugia for years and had an apartment. Even Curatolo had an apartment he could use.

It isn't the case that there is no evidence, rather it is poor quality and doesn't prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are a couple of poster of the PIP type that do a lion's share of PIP exaggerations.

For me the PGP's greatest fault is talking about behavior as if it is evidence.

The greatest conspiracy ever talk is just that and not worth responding to.

Agreed. So sue me.

I also agree that Nonsensicalcini does not solely rely on female Y-Haplotypes to convict.

Acc. to Luca Cheli, the section this is in is one detailing Nencini's objection to finding contamination on the bra-clasp (165). Conti & Vecchiotti see four samples in addition to Meredith's genetic profile as indication of contamination, not as something to convict Raffaele on.

Why? Well for one thing the sample pointing to Raffaele, is only really pointing to a large group of males which excludes Rudy, but which includes Raffaele. So in that sense it is not even a pointer to Raffaele "on the preponderance of the evidence".

But back to Nencini. Nencini's point in acknowledging C&V's work (note: not discounting it, but acknowledging it!) is to make some phantom reasoning why the other three stray samples are not suspicious, and more importantly not indicative of contamination.

So, he invents things. He just makes it up. Would you call it lying? (Stilicho is sensitive to that, so maybe we should ask Stilicho, he's the expert in contradictory stories!)

Sample #1 on 165 - Nencini says it belongs to Raffaele, when factually it is better to say that it is representative of a group of males from which Raffaele cannot be ruled out.

Sample #2 on 165 - Nencini says it could very well be Meredith's boyfriend's, as Meredith was a normal girl with an active sex life. Did Nencini say this because this sample was ever tested? No. Nencini just invents it. Makes it up. If I were engaged in PIP exaggeration I'd say Nencini lied and is going to the fiery lake of Hades as a result.

Samples #3 and #4 on 165 - Nencini concedes that Conti & Vecchiotti got all this right, and he then he searches for an innocent reason for two more men's samples to be there, without making Meredith out to be promiscuous, and (more importanly) not to suspect contamination.

Nencini accomplishes this by attributing these two samples to Meredith's girlfriends, women who may have come in contact with that bra-clasp directly, because (remember this) the point here is for Nencini to argue against contamination.

So Nencini invents female Y-haplotypes. Makes it up. Invents it. All in a strained effort to say that what was found on 165 was not a result of contamination.

There. I've tried dearly to avoid hyperbole and exaggeration, or PIP exuberance in outlining the bleedingly obvious.

They are innocent.

 

[Grinder]

Bill,

Nonsecini doesn't need the Y-Haplotypes to be from women. You are making a mountain of a mole hill on this and by doing it the way you are doing it you make your argument look foolish and miss the bigger point that he doesn't understand the science.

The defense could make the point that while attributing unidentified Y-haplotypes to women doesn't impact the reasoning significantly it does show that the court does not understand some very basic aspects of DNA. If the court doesn't understand the basics then how can they be expected to understand the complexities of LCN DNA?

 

[Desert Fox]

Is this supposed to be ironic humor? Nonsecini isn't relying on female Y-haplotypes for the conviction. It really changes nothing if he says the unidentified markers are male or female.

When you take his report as a whole (assume what has been reported about it), the report makes basically no sense. It is not as if he made just one mistake but the whole report seems to be riddled with errors. The "Y" haplogroup is a symptom of this.

 

[Grinder]

When you take his report as a whole (assume what has been reported about it), the report makes basically no sense. It is not as if he made just one mistake but the whole report seems to be riddled with errors. The "Y" haplogroup is a symptom of this.

That may well be the case. I've only seen parts of it. My point is that saying the whole thing is ridiculous while perhaps true isn't an effective approach. If he doesn't understand something as basic as Y-Haplotype then a very strong argument can be made that he doesn't understand the more nuanced aspects of the DNA WHICH IS CRUCIAL to the conviction.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill,

Nonsecini doesn't need the Y-Haplotypes to be from women. You are making a mountain of a mole hill on this and by doing it the way you are doing it you make your argument look foolish and miss the bigger point that he doesn't understand the science.

The defense could make the point that while attributing unidentified Y-haplotypes to women doesn't impact the reasoning significantly it does show that the court does not understand some very basic aspects of DNA. If the court doesn't understand the basics then how can they be expected to understand the complexities of LCN DNA?

Yes he does. It's the core of his argument of why the clasp is not contaminated. The issue is the claim of contamination, and he says (acc. to Cheli) that three of the four samples are there by innocent means, direct and understandable contact with Meredith's bra-clasp. He does this to "prove" Raffaele's can only be there as a result of assault.

More men than Meredith's boyfriend = contamination - so implies Nencini. So he makes the last two women.

Go ahead, shoot the messenger. Your argument is not with me, it is with Nencini.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

While it is known that Rudy was caught in the Milan nursery with the stolen laptops and not much more, the PIP call it a one man crime wave. PIP call him a drifter when he lived in Perugia for years and had an apartment. Even Curatolo had an apartment he could use.

...

There are a couple of poster of the PIP type that do a lion's share of PIP exaggerations.

I think it's a form of cheating to tar all pro-innocence posters with the brush of the dumbest things you can remember any pro-innocence poster saying. Especially when you are exaggerating ("the PIP call it a one man crime wave") the things they said to make your case.

If we assumed all pro-guilt posters all believed the dumbest things any pro-guilt poster ever said, well, I'm sure you can see the problem there.

The intellectually honest approach is to engage with the best versions of the pro-guilt and anti-guilt case. However as you know the best version of the pro-guilt case is still an incoherent, wildly improbable mess of suppositions promoting a theory of a once-in-history crime with no clear timeline and no clear motive. Whereas the best version of the pro-innocence case satisfactorily explains all the reliable evidence with a mundane hypothesis, a clear timeline and an everyday criminal motive.

 

[Grinder]

I think it's a form of cheating to tar all pro-innocence posters with the brush of the dumbest things you can remember any pro-innocence poster saying. Especially when you are exaggerating ("the PIP call it a one man crime wave") the things they said to make your case.

If we assumed all pro-guilt posters all believed the dumbest things any pro-guilt poster ever said, well, I'm sure you can see the problem there.

The intellectually honest approach is to engage with the best versions of the pro-guilt and anti-guilt case. However as you know the best version of the pro-guilt case is still an incoherent, wildly improbable mess of suppositions promoting a theory of a once-in-history crime with no clear timeline and no clear motive. Whereas the best version of the pro-innocence case satisfactorily explains all the reliable evidence with a mundane hypothesis, a clear timeline and an everyday criminal motive.

Mostly I agree but some of the stuff is very wide spread among PIP and certainly FOA. The crime wave has been a major theme here and elsewhere as well as the drifter label.

I agree that the PGP do little to make an actual case based on the evidence preferring body language, tweets of cousins, notes in diaries and behavior analysis by unemployed Scottish social workers or DNA by a receptionist at a knock off factory in Milan.

 

[Grinder]

Yes he does. It's the core of his argument of why the clasp is not contaminated. The issue is the claim of contamination, and he says (acc. to Cheli) that three of the four samples are there by innocent means, direct and understandable contact with Meredith's bra-clasp. He does this to "prove" Raffaele's can only be there as a result of assault.

More men than Meredith's boyfriend = contamination - so implies Nencini. So he makes the last two women.

Go ahead, shoot the messenger. Your argument is not with me, it is with Nencini.

Bill as you said up-thread he did it to protect her reputation. I don't see why females on the clasp is needed for an explanation of the contamination even if Nonsecini chose it. I don't see why "More men than Meredith's boyfriend = contamination" and more women equals no contamination.

My argument is with you because the presentation you make is weak and ineffective IMO. It is much more significant that he doesn't understand DNA science. Push on your point and they can just okay those were most likely men's DNA but we didn't see a need to hurt poor Meredith's family anymore.

 

[acbytesla]

Yes he does. It's the core of his argument of why the clasp is not contaminated. The issue is the claim of contamination, and he says (acc. to Cheli) that three of the four samples are there by innocent means, direct and understandable contact with Meredith's bra-clasp. He does this to "prove" Raffaele's can only be there as a result of assault.

More men than Meredith's boyfriend = contamination - so implies Nencini. So he makes the last two women.

Go ahead, shoot the messenger. Your argument is not with me, it is with Nencini.

I can't help but wonder how likely it would be to find 3 other women's DNA on a bra clasp other than the donor? I find that highly unlikely but obviously not as unlikely as them having XY chromosones or three men. If this isn't proof of contamination, I have to wonder seriously what is??

 

[acbytesla]

Mostly I agree but some of the stuff is very wide spread among PIP and certainly FOA. The crime wave has been a major theme here and elsewhere as well as the drifter label.

I agree that the PGP do little to make an actual case based on the evidence preferring body language, tweets of cousins, notes in diaries and behavior analysis by unemployed Scottish social workers or DNA by a receptionist at a knock off factory in Milan.

Well Grinder, What would you say is a crime wave? There is evidence linking or suggesting Rudy to 5 break ins in a month. My guess is those are the ones where there is some connection. Most burglaries and break-ins go undiscovered with little to connect anyone to them. If there is this much that connects Rudy to these crimes, do you think they are the only ones? RW pointed out that the Spanish neighbors noticed a bunch of computers. So much that you even went so far as to describe him as a "fence" I think it is more likely that he was a busy burglar than being a fence. But of course we'll never know.

Maybe the term "crime wave" is hyperbole. I really don't think the "drifter" label comes from the FOA, but from the media...so blaming the FOA or IIP for these labels is a mistake.

 

[Desert Fox]

My argument is with you because the presentation you make is weak and ineffective IMO. It is much more significant that he doesn't understand DNA science. Push on your point and they can just okay those were most likely men's DNA but we didn't see a need to hurt poor Meredith's family anymore.

Devon Guzman often fought with her girlfriends and was in a pretty strange love triangle. Does not mean that somebody had the right to murder her.

 

[platonov]

Too close to call ?

I think it's a form of cheating to tar all pro-innocence posters with the brush of the dumbest things you can remember any pro-innocence poster saying. Especially when you are exaggerating ("the PIP call it a one man crime wave") the things they said to make your case.

If we assumed all pro-guilt posters all believed the dumbest things any pro-guilt poster ever said, well, I'm sure you can see the problem there.

The intellectually honest approach is to engage with the best versions of the pro-guilt and anti-guilt case. However as you know the best version of the pro-guilt case is still an incoherent, wildly improbable mess of suppositions promoting a theory of a once-in-history crime with no clear timeline and no clear motive. Whereas the best version of the pro-innocence case satisfactorily explains all the reliable evidence with a mundane hypothesis, a clear timeline and an everyday criminal motive.

Q Is describing this murder as a once-in-history crime an example of best version or dumbest PIP arguments.

Or is it too close to call ?

 

[Grinder]

Well Grinder, What would you say is a crime wave? There is evidence linking or suggesting Rudy to 5 break ins in a month. My guess is those are the ones where there is some connection. Most burglaries and break-ins go undiscovered with little to connect anyone to them. If there is this much that connects Rudy to these crimes, do you think they are the only ones? RW pointed out that the Spanish neighbors noticed a bunch of computers. So much that you even went so far as to describe him as a "fence" I think it is more likely that he was a busy burglar than being a fence. But of course we'll never know.

Maybe the term "crime wave" is hyperbole. I really don't think the "drifter" label comes from the FOA, but from the media...so blaming the FOA or IIP for these labels is a mistake.

There is hard evidence of one illegal entry, the nursery. He didn't break in there but was let in and only had the knife and maybe some change, IIRC.

CT's testimony if against the kids would be discounted because he only came forward with Rudi's name after his picture was in the papers. I find it hard to believe that he ID'ed Rudi the next night and didn't report the name of a man who had broken into his place and allegedly threatened him with a jack knife which nothing corroborates that he did in fact normally do.

He was in possession of stolen merchandise but there is no proof that he actually broke in.

I think if the Spanish account is true that he probably used his Milan connection to fence the goods.

Crime wave is hyperbole and that's what we were talking about.

You think that 5 in over a month would be a crime wave, if it was even 5?

ETA - FOA was using drifter early on before you were watching.