Amanda Knox

@OCCOM BILL,

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Can anyone here honestly answer that question in the affirmative?

Do you really think it's a yes or no question Bill? Isn't it obvious that it will sometimes work and sometimes not work like in any system and that this kind of difference will affect the frequency at which it works instead of flip a binary switch?

1 Reply

Meantime, I'm reading the numero due book in the Carafiglio series, A Walk in the Dark. Within thirty pages the book is Occom Bill's, or maybe not. (Geez, there's even an early page about parachuting.) Lots of asides re the miserableness of the system; none of it new to me after years of reading. The writer has been an attorney, a prosecutor, a judge, now a consultant to the government, apparently, on organized crime (which makes me wonder, but never mind).

People vary within systems. Including in ours in the u.s. Don't tell me police have not interviewed people in the u.s. without rights announcing or attorney supplying. Pass the potato chips. I think I comprehend there is a point at which they have to tell you your rights but you can babble on before that while they egg you on, and I figure that is promoted in the u.s., at the least. I sincerely doubt all u.s. law enforcement tapes every minute, has protections in place from the beginning.
Give me a break, you don't really think that, do you?

You're whining about a tap on the head with a young woman - as far as I know described by the person tapped - who multiply changed her stories. Even the tapped person said she wasn't mistreated later, yet another change in story.

What I like about the Carafiglio books, at least so far, is that the protagonist is a thoughtful person, self questioning.

I suppose it would be news to some that those indicted might claim coercion.
And coercion does exist, everywhere on earth... though it is also tossed up as a refuge when not true.

How are people so sure she was coerced?

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Can anyone here honestly answer that question in the affirmative?

Do you really think it's a yes or no question Bill?

Yes.

Robert Gentel wrote:

Isn't it obvious that it will sometimes work and sometimes not work like in any system and that this kind of difference will affect the frequency at which it works instead of flip a binary switch?

That is obvious of the System in general; but my question regards a specific scenario.

In that specific scenario, any notion of guilt having been proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" is preposterous. I don't understand how anyone could reasonably disagree.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

oralloy wrote:
The fact that there is zero evidence of guilt causes you no reasonable doubt?

I do not consider this a fact.

Can you point to ANY evidence that points to guilt?

Robert Gentel wrote:

To be honest, I'm not sure what involvement she had, if any, in the murder. However I also don't find the notion that being tapped on the back of her head or manhandled is explanation enough for her behavior and changing stories.

Being smacked in the back of the head is a bit more than a "tap".

And having the police beat a confession out of people is a pretty clear reason why they would change their story.

Robert Gentel wrote:

I also don't think her use of marijuana legitimately affected her memory like she claimed. I'm sure that's possible but despite extensive personal research I've never encountered anyone like that.

Indeed. The questionable memory came entirely from police abuse.

Robert Gentel wrote:

I find her record of deceit suspicious, and am wary of the way she's described in American media, but I have not personally drawn any hard conclusions about her involvement in this case.

Changing your story to get the police to stop hitting you is hardly a record of deceit.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

I should also note specifically that I find the combination of these claims to be more likely to indicate that she wants to explain away lies she is knowingly telling than the notion that they beat the lies out of her in addition to the excuse about her lapses in memory.

Can you show ANY lies that she told outside the time the Italian police were beating a confession out of her?

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

oralloy wrote:
However, they clearly knew she was innocent. They convicted her to cover up the fact that inspector Rita Ficarra beat a confession out of an innocent American honors student under the supervision of Giuliano Mignini. So the question of reasonable doubt didn't really enter into it.

Cool story bro.

It's a bit more than a story. It is what the people I named actually did.

0 Replies

@Merry Andrew,

Merry Andrew wrote:

oralloy wrote:
However, they clearly knew she was innocent. They convicted her to cover up the fact that inspector Rita Ficarra beat a confession out of an innocent American honors student under the supervision of Giuliano Mignini. So the question of reasonable doubt didn't really enter into it.

Such atrocities are no laughing matter.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

Not sure what you're on about, Osso. Coercion doesn't work with "freely and voluntarily" waiving one's right to counsel in this country. Of course the authories do their level best to circumvent civil protections but that is hardly an argument against the civil protections themselves.

1 Reply

@Raphillon,

Raphillon wrote:

An innocent could be imprisoned for more than one year, this is unacceptable...

Unacceptable is an understatement. And to make matters worse, in this case the judges kept them imprisoned knowing they were innocent, and then maliciously convicted them.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Can you point to any that proves she was coerced?
I said in my original thread post that I didn't trust the prosecutor and that is from past reading about him, not re this trial. No, I don't have links.
However, I don't see any reason except rollicking patriotism to trust Amanda the change artist.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

You're whining about a tap on the head with a young woman - as far as I know described by the person tapped - who multiply changed her stories.

Being smacked in the head is a bit more than a tap.

And she only changed her story when the police were smacking her in the head.

She has been very consistent in her story aside from that.

ossobuco wrote:

Even the tapped person said she wasn't mistreated later, yet another change in story.

I believe you are misinformed on that count.

ossobuco wrote:

How are people so sure she was coerced?

Aside from the fact that her story of police abuse has been very consistent, and aside the fact that the Italian police have been caught in lie after lie, there is the fact that she issued a written retraction of the claims the very next day, and the police ignored the retraction.

I think the next day retraction blows a pretty big hole in any claim that she was intentionally leading police to the wrong man (not to mention her obvious relief when he was cleared).

And I think the police ignoring the retraction blows a pretty big hole in any claims that they were only going after him because she was misleading them.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

Can you point to any that proves she was coerced?

She issued a written retraction (that included the abuse allegations) the very next day, which the police ignored.

That blows a pretty big hole in any claims that she was intentionally misleading the police I think.

ossobuco wrote:

However, I don't see any reason except rollicking patriotism to trust Amanda the change artist.

Her story has been extremely consistent aside from the one day where the Italian police beat a confession out of her.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Tell me more about all this smacking. Were you right there?

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

Tell me more about all this smacking.

A female officer slapped her in the back of the head twice, both times when the police did not get the answer they wanted.

ossobuco wrote:

Were you right there?

No.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

I am not against civil protections and I find both our countries and others sorely lacking in these in various degrees over time.

I'm talking about the claimed by the suspect physical coercion... what else would I be "on about"?

Oralloy preaches as if he were in the room.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

Somewhere I read that Guede avering to be on the toilet while it happened sounded the truest thing.

Actually, it is safe to say Guede was lying.

I think somewhere in this thread I suggested that Guede might also be innocent, and could have witnessed an Italian junkie breaking in and killing her. Given the fact that they maliciously convicted two other people, I was not really eager to assume they were telling the truth about Guede. After all, if the break in really was staged as the Italian police claimed, that would be the *only* time in this case that they told the truth.

I couldn't find my post, but yours popped up.

Anyway, it seems I was half right and half wrong. I got the part about the Italian police lying right (no surprise there, given all their other lies, I guess). But my sympathies for Guede were misplaced.

Looks like he has a history of breaking and entering through windows while carrying a large knife.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/03/fugitive-tries-again.html

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

I am not against civil protections and I find both our countries and others sorely lacking in these in various degrees over time.

I'm talking about the claimed by the suspect physical coercion... what else would I be "on about"?

Oralloy preaches as if he were in the room.

I'm not Oralloy, and I've attached little, if any, weight to the alleged slaps. 40 hours of interrogation is more than sufficient to demonstrate coercion. All parties changed their stories repeatedly after lengthy interrogations without counsel. I wouldn’t be terribly convinced that any of their testimony was reliable.
I'd recommend reading Miranda v Arizona to get a feel for what should be considered coercion, and appropriate remedies for same. If you’re really interested in civil protections; you’ll find this relatively short case very interesting.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Raphillon wrote:
An innocent could be imprisoned for more than one year, this is unacceptable...

Unacceptable is an understatement. And to make matters worse, in this case the judges kept them imprisoned knowing they were innocent, and then maliciously convicted them.

And on top of that, this is going to eventually rebound and victimize the Kerchers all over again.

The notion that Guede was in on this with Knox and her boyfriend led the appeals court to give him mitigating circumstances that he clearly doesn't deserve, slashing his maximum sentence from 30 to 16 years.

Either the prosecutors or the Kerchers could appeal this, but I don't think they are going to. The Kerchers seems to have bought into the lie that Knox and her boyfriend were actually involved, and I'm sure the prosecutors are more interested in covering up the fact that they beat a confession out of an innocent American honors student than they are in going after the actual killer.

And by the time Knox and her boyfriend are in front of the appeals court, it will be too late to appeal Guede's sentence cut.

I'm more concerned with rescuing Knox and her boyfriend, but I do feel bad that one side effect of this whole circus is that the Kerchers are not going to get very much in the way of justice.

It shouldn't be too many more years now before Guede is up for parole.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

I've no investment in Guede, but the comment re his comment rang out as true in comparison to a lot of other stuff. I posted that as a near joke, but not entirely.

Remember, I, like many others here, don't know who is culpable of what. I'm just a far away observer, as you all are.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I have read that you said that some near dozens of times. Can you prove this happened?

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know